Court Opinion

ID: 9855679
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:29:10.164959+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:36:19.854523
License: Public Domain

J. J. Kelley, J.
(dissenting). The Supreme Court having been given sole authority to "establish, modify, amend and simplify the practice and procedure in all courts of this state”, only that Court has authority to make the requested change. Const 1963, art 6,,§ 5.
One purpose of the Michigan Rules of Evidence is "to secure fairness in administration”. Unless a change in MRE 609(b) applies to all witnesses, whether litigants or otherwise, it will not operate fairly.
Such a change, if designated to operate retroac*259tively, would be unfair to litigants in other cases whose trials involved application of the present MRE 609(b) and were conducted simultaneously with the case at bar.
A retroactive change would also fly in the face of another intended purpose of the Michigan Rules of Evidence, which is the "elimination of unjustifiable expense and delay”. Retroactive changes in rules or substance almost inevitably lead to retrials, delays and waste of taxpayers’ and litigants’ money.