|
State of Michigan v Rayfield Brazel |
Michigan Court of Appeals |
2008 |
---------------------------------------- |
|
State of Michigan v Ronald Martin Campbell |
Michigan Court of Appeals |
2008 |
---------------------------------------- |
|
State of Michigan v Stanley Gayheart |
Michigan Court of Appeals |
2008 |
---------------------------------------- |
|
State of Michigan v Steven Charles Mead |
Michigan Court of Appeals |
2008 |
---------------------------------------- |
|
State of Michigan v Touchette |
Michigan Court of Appeals |
2008 |
Corroborated tip created reasonable suspicion for traffic stop given accurate description of defendant's vehicle, the number of passengers, and the direction in which it was traveling further established reliability and veracity. |
|
State of Michigan v William Louis Bruneau |
Michigan Court of Appeals |
2008 |
---------------------------------------- |
|
State of Michigan v Perkins, 482 Mich 1118; 758 NW2d 280 (2008) |
Michigan Supreme Court |
2008 |
Heidi's Law (which removed the three drunk driving convictions within 10 year cap on felony drunk driving charges) does not violate ex post facto provisions of the federal and state Constitutions. Since Heidi's Law was passed, you can be charged with a felony OWI 3rd drunk driving if you have any three alcohol-related convictions in a lifetime, e.g. OWVI and/or OWI. NOTE: This may only include ONE (1) zero tolerance conviction for enhancement purposes, since Michigan lawmakers do not want a minor who gets two minor BAC convictions to rack up a felony with a new charge shortly after his or her 21st birthday.
|
|
State of Michigan v Sam, 482 Mich 1072; 769 NW2d 227 (2008) |
Michigan Supreme Court |
2008 |
OWI 3rd and operating while intoxicated causing serious impairment of a body function - multiple sentences consolidated |
|
State of Michigan v Bain, Docket No. 268527, Unpublished June 21, 2007 (2007) |
Michigan Court of Appeals |
2007 |
Relying essentially on Ohio law, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that the Datamaster was accurate and reliable, satisfying Daubert because lawmakers had adopted it. But lawmakers never adopted the Datamaster, ever. In fact, the Datamaster was never even properly adopted in Michigan through the Administrative Procedures Act. |
|
State of Michigan v Bryan Vincent Smigielski |
Michigan Court of Appeals |
2007 |
---------------------------------------- |