Case Name: People v. Swain
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 2015-09-30
Citations: 498 Mich. 890
Docket Number: No. 150994; Court of Appeals No. 314564
Parties: People v Swain,
Judges: MCCORMACK, J., did not participate because of her prior involvement in this case as counsel for a party.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 498
Pages: 890–891

Head Matter:
Leave to Appeal Granted September 30, 2015:
People v Swain,
No. 150994; Court of Appeals No. 314564.

Opinion:
The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the test set forth in People v Cress, 468 Mich 678, 692 (2003), for determining whether a defendant is entitled to a new trial based on newly discovered evidence applies in determining whether a second or subsequent motion for relief from judgment is based on "a claim of new evidence that was not discovered before the first such motion" -under MCR 6.502(G)(2); (2) whether the defendant is entitled to a new trial premised on the prosecution's violation of the rule set forth in Brady v Maryland, 373 US 83; 83 S Ct 1194; 10 L Ed 2d 215 (1963); (3) by what standard(s) Michigan courts consider a defendant's assertion that the evidence demonstrates a significant possibility of actual innocence in the context of a motion brought pursuant to MCR 6.502(G), and whether the defendant in this case qualifies under that standard; (4) whether the Michigan Court Rules, MCR 6.500, et seq. or another provision, provide a basis for relief where a defendant demonstrates a significant possibility of actual innocence; (5) whether, if MCR 6.502(G) does bar relief, there is an independent basis on which a defendant who demonstrates a significant possibility of actual innocence may nonetheless seek relief under the United States or Michigan Constitutions; and (6) whether the defendant is entitled to a new trial pursuant to MCL 770.1.
The Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan and the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
MCCORMACK, J., did not participate because of her prior involvement in this case as counsel for a party.