Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

People v. Traylor

245 Mich. App. 460 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
People v. Traylor

198 Citing cases

  1. People v. Russell

    254 Mich. App. 11 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 7 times

    Further, that counsel did not pursue futile motions or meaningless discovery did not demonstrate good cause because matters of general legal expertise and strategy fall within the sphere of the professional judgment of counsel. See, People v Traylor, 245 Mich. App. 460, 462; 628 N.W.2d 120 (2001) (filing frivolous motions), People v Jones, 168 Mich. App. 191, 195; 423 N.W.2d 614 (1988) (questioning witnesses), and People v O'Brien, 89 Mich. App. 704, 708; 282 N.W.2d 190 (1979) (questioning witnesses and juror voir dire). Moreover, it is apparent that the trial court was concerned that appointing substitute counsel, when the jury was waiting to hear a case that had already experienced substantial delay, would unreasonably disrupt the judicial process.

  2. People v. Bauder

    269 Mich. App. 174 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 115 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Garcia-Meza rationale and applying forfeiture rule to domestic-violence victim's out-of-court statements when defendant was on trial for murdering her

    Next, defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion by denying defense counsel's pretrial motion to withdraw. People v. Traylor, 245 Mich App 460, 462; 628 NW2d 120 (2001). Because good cause for substitution of counsel did not exist, we disagree.

  3. Nali v. Phillips

    630 F. Supp. 2d 807 (E.D. Mich. 2009)   Cited 6 times
    In Nali, the court discussed the federal standard for sufficiency of the evidence, citing relevant Supreme Court precedent.

    A trial court's decision whether to appoint substitute counsel is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. People v. Traylor, 245 Mich. App. 460, 462, 628 N.W.2d 120 (2001). A trial court's denial of a motion for a continuance is also reviewed for an abuse of discretion.

  4. People v Rose

    289 Mich. App. 499 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 142 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the trial court properly denied a motion for an evidentiary hearing challenging a juror's bias, because there was no evidence that the juror was partial, and the defendant "essentially invited the trial court to speculate" that the juror might have had some bias

    The decision whether and when to make a motion are matters of trial strategy and professional judgment that are entrusted to a defendant's trial counsel. People v. Traylor, 245 Mich.App. 460, 463, 628 N.W.2d 120 (2001). And Rose's trial counsel may reasonably have concluded that the trial court would not grant a motion to exclude Cottrell's testimony at a point sufficiently in advance of trial to correct the discovery violation.

  5. People v. Strickland

    No. 298707 (Mich. Ct. App. Jul. 28, 2011)

    " As this Court has explained: People v Traylor, 245 Mich App 460, 462; 628 NW2d 120 (2001).People v Yost, 278 Mich App 341, 379; 749 NW2d 753 (2008).

  6. People v. Strickland

    293 Mich. App. 393 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 219 times
    Holding that a substitution of counsel "would have unreasonably delayed the judicial process" where the defendant "waited until the day of trial to request new counsel" [t]he jury and witnesses were present, and the prosecutor and defense counsel were ready to proceed."

    As this Court has explained: People v. Traylor, 245 Mich.App. 460, 462, 628 N.W.2d 120 (2001). People v. Yost, 278 Mich.App. 341, 379, 749 N.W.2d 753 (2008).

  7. People v. Brown

    No. 298656 (Mich. Ct. App. Dec. 15, 2011)

    The filing of a grievance does not automatically create a conflict. See People v Traylor, 245 Mich App 460, 463; 628 NW2d 120 (2001). Accordingly, we find no error.

  8. People v. Moore

    No. 300281 (Mich. Ct. App. Jan. 17, 2012)

    "A trial court's decision regarding substitution of counsel will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion." People v Traylor, 245 Mich App 460, 462; 628 NW2d 120 (2001). Regarding the appointment of substitute counsel, this Court has stated:

  9. People v. Coronado

    No. 302310 (Mich. Ct. App. Feb. 14, 2012)   Cited 3 times

    Defendant also claims that the trial court relied on inaccurate information when imposing sentence, but does not identify what information was inaccurate. People v Traylor, 245 Mich App 460, 464; 628 NW2d 120 (2001). Finally, defendant argues that the trial court erroneously refused to grant him proper credit for time served in jail.

  10. People v. Clark

    No. 301317 (Mich. Ct. App. Mar. 15, 2012)   Cited 1 times

    We disagree. "A trial court's decision regarding substitution of counsel will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion." People v Traylor, 245 Mich App 460, 462; 628 NW2d 120 (2001). An indigent defendant is guaranteed the right to counsel; however, he is not entitled to have the attorney of his choice appointed simply by requesting that the attorney originally appointed be replaced.