Court Opinion

ID: 9689333
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:28:15.864356+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:47.088537
License: Public Domain

Beasley, J.
(concurring in result). I concur in the result reached by the majority.
Under the facts of this case, where the Macomb Prosecutor apparently did not choose to seek a warrant for breaking and entering or for receipt of stolen property, the magistrate did not possess discretion to deny a warrant to the Oakland Prosecutor on the basis that the prosecution must be brought in Macomb County. This suggests that there are situations where the prosecutor’s right to prosecute under MCL 767.63; MSA 28.1003 is circumscribed and where the magistrate may have discretion to deny a warrant, even though the facts are otherwise sufficient.
For example, where prosecutors in different counties compete with requests for separate warrants on the same facts, I would believe a magistrate would have an area of discretion. A defendant should not have to defend twice in different counties; that is not what MCL 767.63; MSA 28.1003 means.
With this caveat, I join the majority in result.