Case Name: PEOPLE v. ABESS
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1969-06-23
Citations: 17 Mich. App. 617
Docket Number: Docket No. 4,582
Parties: PEOPLE v. ABESS
Judges: BEFORE: Fitzgerald, P. J., and Levin and T. M. Burns, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 17
Pages: 617–618

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v. ABESS
Appeal and Error — Criminal Law — Appeal by People — Evidence— Suppression.
An appeal by the people from an order suppressing evidence and quashing the warrant in a criminal case may be taken by leave granted only (CL 1948, §§ 770.3, 770.12; GCR 1963, 806.1, 806.2).
References for Points in Headnote
4 Am Jur 2d, Appeal and Error § 268.
Right of prosecution to review of decision quashing or dismissing indictment or information, or sustaining demurrer thereto, '92 ALR 1137,
Appeal from Recorder’s Court of Detroit, Robert J. Colombo, J. Submitted Division 1 May 12, 1969, at Detroit.
(Docket No. 4,582.)
Decided June 23, 1969.
John Abess was charged with unlawful possession of pornographic films. Defendant’s motion to suppress evidence and quash the warrant granted. The people appeal.
Appeal dismissed.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, William L. Gahalan, Prosecuting Attorney, Samuel J. Torina, Chief Appellate Lawyer, and Carl Ziemba, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
BEFORE: Fitzgerald, P. J., and Levin and T. M. Burns, JJ.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The people appealed to this Court by claim of right from an order of the Detroit recorder's court granting defendant's motion to suppress evidence and quash the warrant.
An appeal by the people from such an order requires leave and is restricted by the provisions of CL 1948, § 770.3, 770.12 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.1100, 28.1109); GCR 1963, 806.1, 806.2. See City of Portage v. Timmerman (1968), 11 Mich App 498; People v. Harry James Smith (1969), 16 Mich App 606.
This Court being without jurisdiction, the appeal is dismissed without prejudice to apply for leave. City of Dearborn v. Pulte-Strang, Inc. (1968), 12 Mich App 161.
If the people decide to apply for leave, their attention is directed to the possible application of Lee v. Florida (1968), 392 US 378 (88 S Ct 2096, 20 L Ed 2d 1166) and Fuller v. Alaska (1968), 393 US 80 (89 S Ct 61, 21 L Ed 2d 212) to the facts of this case.
Dismissed.