Opinion ID: 1303274
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: HOBBINS v ATTORNEY GENERAL

Text: (DOCKET NOS. 99752, 99758) THE DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACTION Shortly after the Legislature enacted the assisted suicide statute, a group of plaintiffs, two of whom are alleged to be suffering from terminal cancer, a friend of one of them, and seven medical care professionals, brought an action in Wayne Circuit Court, seeking a declaration that the statute was unconstitutional. The parties moved for summary judgment and the plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the statute. The circuit court found the statute to be unconstitutional. [1] First, it concluded that there were two violations of Const 1963, art 4, § 24: the statute did not have a single object, and there was a change in the purpose of the bill during its passage through the Legislature. Second, the court found a due process right to commit suicide. However, it declined to issue a preliminary injunction, concluding that hearings would be needed to determine whether the statute placed an undue burden on that right. The Attorney General filed a claim of appeal in the Court of Appeals. PEOPLE v KEVORKIAN (DOCKET NO. 99591) THE WAYNE COUNTY ASSISTED SUICIDE CASE Also after the enactment of the assisted suicide statute, defendant Kevorkian is alleged to have assisted in the death of Donald O'Keefe. The defendant was charged under the statute and bound over after preliminary examination. He moved to dismiss, and the circuit court granted the motion. The court rejected the art 4, § 24 challenges to the statute, but found a due process interest in the decision to end one's life, and that the law impermissibly burdened that interest. The court held an evidentiary hearing to determine if the facts satisfied the four-part test that it had set forth in its opinion. [2] Following the hearing, the court issued an order concluding that the facts of the case met the standard and dismissed the charge. The prosecutor appealed to the Court of Appeals. PEOPLE v KEVORKIAN (DOCKET NO. 99759) THE OAKLAND COUNTY ASSISTED SUICIDE CASE Defendant Kevorkian was charged in two separate files with assisting in the suicides of Merion Frederick and Ali Khalili. The defendant was bound over after a preliminary examination in one case and waived examination in the other. The circuit court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss. The court discussed the potential privacy and liberty interests in ending one's life, concluding that a person does have the right to commit suicide. However, it further concluded that defendant Kevorkian lacked standing to challenge the statute. [3] The court also found that the statute was unconstitutional because it had more than one object and because its purpose was changed during its passage through the Legislature. The prosecuting attorney appealed. PEOPLE v KEVORKIAN (DOCKET NO. 99674) THE OAKLAND COUNTY MURDER CASE Before the statute was enacted, defendant Kevorkian allegedly assisted in the deaths of Sherry Miller and Marjorie Wantz on October 23, 1991. He was indicted by a citizens' grand jury on two counts of murder. [4] After a preliminary examination, the defendant was bound over for trial. [5] In the circuit court, the defendant moved to dismiss, and the circuit judge granted the motion, concluding that assisting in suicide does not fall within the crime of murder. The prosecutor appealed.