Court Opinion

ID: 9729765
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 14:48:12.527864+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:01.055729
License: Public Domain

Weaver, C.J.
I agree with Justice Cavanagh to the extent that he concludes that § 7409 and the conspiracy statute must be read collectively, that § 7409 is applicable in the present case because conspiracy is necessarily linked to a substantive offense, and that it would be impossible to charge conspiracy to violate article 7 without incorporating an article 7 offense into the conspiracy charge.
Further, although in People v Mezy, 453 Mich 269, 278-281; 551 NW2d 389 (1996), I would have adopted the dual sovereignty doctrine, thus recognizing the validity of dual federal and state prosecutions, I nonetheless am compelled to conclude that the “same act” language of § 7409 bars the subsequent state prosecution in this case, where the facts suggest the existence of a single conspiracy. Because defendants had already been convicted of conspiracy in federal court, the subsequent state prosecution for conspiracy was barred.
Markman, J., took no part in the decision of this case.