Court Opinion

ID: 9689327
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:27:58.579349+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:47.038325
License: Public Domain

R. M. Maher, P.J.
(dissenting). I respectfully dissent. When the police have more than a mere suspicion that a person in custody has committed a particular crime, they cannot return the suspect to the scene of the crime but must take him or her to the police station and conduct a line-up at which the suspect is represented by counsel.1 The People v Anderson2 exception cited by the majority is inapplicable unless the police lack probable cause for a formal arrest.
Since the police obtained a search warrant on the basis of this tainted identification procedure and since incriminating evidence obtained thereby was introduced at trial, reversal is required._
*487My resolution of this issue renders discussion of defendants’ remaining contentions unnecessary.
I would reverse.

 See People v Dixon, 85 Mich App 271; 271 NW2d 196 (1978); People v Starks, 107 Mich App 377, 380; 309 NW2d 556 (1981).

 389 Mich 155; 205 NW2d 461 (1973).