Ads
related to: michigan contempt of court statute rules of procedure and evidence
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A person cited for indirect contempt is entitled to notice of the charge and an opportunity for hearing of the evidence of contempt and, since there is no written procedure, may or may not be allowed to present evidence in rebuttal. Contempt of court in a civil suit is generally not considered to be a criminal offense, with the party benefiting ...
In each case, the court ruled against suppressing the evidence. However, the Michigan Supreme Court reversed these rulings. Relying largely on federal precedent, especially Terry v. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled that the "protective search" violated the Fourth Amendment, and thus the "poisonous fruit" of the illegal search must be discarded.
In an effort to prevent such abuses, Congress passed a law in 1831 limiting the application of the summary contempt procedures to offenses committed in or near the court. A new section, which survives today as the Omnibus Clause, was added to punish contempts committed outside of the court, but only after indictment and trial by jury. [19] [20]
Tampering with evidence is closely related to the legal issue of spoliation of evidence, which is usually the civil law or due process version of the same concept (but may itself be a crime). Tampering with evidence is also closely related to obstruction of justice and perverting the course of justice , and these two kinds of crimes are often ...
Until the year 2000, an alternate codification known as the Michigan Statutes Annotated (MSA), which differed from the MCL in both its organization and numbering system, was also in use. Until the discontinuation of the MSA by LexisNexis, Michigan Court Rules required citation to both the MCL and MSA in all court filings.
Herschel Fink, general counsel for the Detroit Free Press, said the rule appears to violate case law from the U.S. Supreme Court and Michigan courts that says court records are open to the public.
Judicial misconduct occurs when a judge acts in ways that are considered unethical or otherwise violate the judge's obligations of impartial conduct.. Actions that can be classified as judicial misconduct include: conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts (as an extreme example: "falsification of facts" at summary judgment); using the ...
The ruling is the second recent court decision that has curbed Detroit's aggressive vehicle forfeiture program. Michigan Supreme Court Rules Against Detroit's Asset Forfeiture Racket Skip to main ...