You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

People of Michigan v. Darrick Lee-Doman Smith

Citation: Not availableDocket: 129015

Court: Michigan Supreme Court; October 30, 2005; Michigan; State Supreme Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The Michigan Supreme Court issued an order on October 31, 2005, denying an application for leave to appeal from a June 1, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals in the case of Darrick Lee-Doman Smith. The Court concluded that the issues raised did not warrant review. Justice Kelly expressed a differing opinion, suggesting that the case should be held in abeyance pending the outcome of "People v Drohan," for which leave to appeal had been granted. The order was certified as a true and complete copy by the Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court.

Legal Issues Addressed

Certification of Judicial Orders

Application: The order from the Michigan Supreme Court was certified as a true and complete copy, ensuring the authenticity and official status of the court's decision.

Reasoning: The order was certified as a true and complete copy by the Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court.

Denial of Application for Leave to Appeal

Application: The Michigan Supreme Court denied the application for leave to appeal, indicating that the issues raised were not significant enough to warrant review.

Reasoning: The Michigan Supreme Court issued an order on October 31, 2005, denying an application for leave to appeal from a June 1, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals in the case of Darrick Lee-Doman Smith.

Judicial Disagreement on Case Handling

Application: Justice Kelly expressed disagreement with the majority's decision, proposing that the case should be held in abeyance pending a related decision, highlighting procedural considerations in the appellate process.

Reasoning: Justice Kelly expressed a differing opinion, suggesting that the case should be held in abeyance pending the outcome of 'People v Drohan,' for which leave to appeal had been granted.