People of Michigan v. Daniel Horacek ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • Order                                                                                        Michigan Supreme Court
    Lansing, Michigan
    October 1, 2014                                                                                      Robert P. Young, Jr.,
    Chief Justice
    147981 & (18)                                                                                        Michael F. Cavanagh
    Stephen J. Markman
    Mary Beth Kelly
    Brian K. Zahra
    Bridget M. McCormack
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,                                                                        David F. Viviano,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,                                                                                       Justices
    v                                                                 SC: 147981
    COA: 317527
    Oakland CC: 2012-241894-FH
    DANIEL HORACEK,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    _________________________________________/
    By order of March 28, 2014, the prosecuting attorney was directed to answer the
    application for leave to appeal the September 12, 2013 order of the Court of Appeals. On
    order of the Court, the answer having been received, the application for leave to appeal is
    again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal,
    we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration, as on leave granted, of
    whether the defendant’s warrantless arrest violated his Fourth Amendment rights. If it
    did, then the Court of Appeals should consider: (1) whether the Oakland Circuit Court
    and the prosecutor consented, tacitly or otherwise, to entry of the defendant’s nolo
    contendere plea to unarmed robbery, conditioned on the defendant’s ability to challenge
    on appeal the trial court’s denial of his motions to suppress the evidence and to quash the
    bindover, see MCR 6.301(C)(2); (2) whether the defendant is entitled to withdraw his
    plea pursuant to MCR 6.301(C)(2); and (3) whether the defendant’s entitlement to relief
    is impacted by the prosecutor’s statement at the plea hearing that any Fourth Amendment
    violation would be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because there was sufficient
    untainted evidence to prosecute the defendant, see People v Reid, 
    420 Mich 326
    , 337
    (1984). 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.
    I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
    foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
    October 1, 2014
    p0924
    Clerk
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 147981

Filed Date: 10/1/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014