Court Opinion

ID: 9687185
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:18:09.435252+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:24.638930
License: Public Domain

R. M. Maher, J.
(dissenting). I must respectfully dissent. The trial judge’s findings of fact and conclusions of law do not comport with the unambiguous requirements of MCR 2.517(A)(1) and People v Jackson, 390 Mich 621; 212 NW2d 918 (1973). Appellate courts are in a sorry position to second-guess a trial court’s findings and conclusions where, as here, the deficiencies concern elements *198of the charged offense, as opposed to credibility issues and conflicts within the evidence. People v Davis, 126 Mich App 66, 70-71; 337 NW2d 315 (1983). I would remand the case for additional findings of fact pursuant to MCR 2.517(A)(1).