Court Opinion

ID: 9671051
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:30:10.340875+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:52:43.188681
License: Public Domain

S. Everett, J.
(dissenting). In People v Talley, 410 Mich 378; 301 NW2d 809 (1981), the Supreme Court stated that neither the trial court nor the Court of Appeals could properly rule on a motion to suppress evidence without there having been a full evidentiary hearing. At page 389, the Court said:
"For the Court of Appeals to presume to rule on the merits in such an absence of proper procedure requires this Court to point out to that Court and all trial courts that a motion to suppress evidence requires the holding of a full evidentiary hearing and any attempt to rule on such a motion on the basis of a preliminary examination transcript alone is inadequate and erroneous.”
In this case, no such hearing was held. In view of the mandate of the Supreme Court, it appears to me that this matter should be remanded for the required hearing. I therefore must respectully dissent.