From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Smart

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Jan 30, 2015
497 Mich. 950 (Mich. 2015)

Opinion

Docket No. 149040. COA No. 314980.

2015-01-30

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Mantrease Datrell SMART, Defendant–Appellee.


Prior report: 304 Mich.App. 244, 850 N.W.2d 579.

Order

On January 13, 2015, the Court heard oral argument on the application for leave to appeal the February 11, 2014 judgment of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the application is again considered. MCR 7.302(H)(1). As the parties concede, MRE 410(4) does not require that a statement made during plea discussions be made in the presence of an attorney for the prosecuting authority. It only requires that the defendant's statement be made “in the course of plea discussions” with the prosecuting attorney. Therefore, in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we OVERRULE the Court of Appeals statement to the contrary in People v. Hannold, 217 Mich.App. 382, 391, 551 N.W.2d 710 (1996). In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.


Summaries of

People v. Smart

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Jan 30, 2015
497 Mich. 950 (Mich. 2015)
Case details for

People v. Smart

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Mantrease Datrell…

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan.

Date published: Jan 30, 2015

Citations

497 Mich. 950 (Mich. 2015)
497 Mich. 950

Citing Cases

People v. Stiff

It only requires that the defendant's statement be made 'in the course of plea discussions' with the…

People v. Caddell

[Citations omitted.] In People v. Hannold , 217 Mich. App. 382, 384, 551 N.W.2d 710 (1996), overruled in part…