Go to Law Offices of Michael B. Skinner

Recent Entries
Michigan Supreme Court Term
Typos
Supreme Court Elections
2010 Appellate Bench Bar Conference
Pre-Arrest Silence and Tacit Admissions
Credibility Determinations at Ginther Hearings
Medical Malpractice Kerfuffle
Slip and Fall
Child Support and Termination of Parental Rights
Lost
Knife Length
People v Waterstone
United States v Comstock
Graham v Florida
What is Truth?
When a Prosecutor Voluntarily Dimisses a Case
People v Houthoofd
Streaming Oral Argument
Remand to a Different Judge
Disqualifying Prosecutor
Sex Offender Registration and HYTA
Doubling the sentence for drug offenses
Rights of Parents
Class Certification
Drinking and Driving


ARCHIVES

RSS Feed

Blogroll
Confrontation Blog
Crim Law
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Direct Appeal (CA10 Criminal Cases)
Fourth Amendment
Have Opinion Will Travel
How Appealing
Michigan Bankruptcy Law
Michigan Collection Law
Michigan Construction Law
Michigan Drunk Driving
Michigan Elder Law
Michigan Health Care Law
Michigan Long Term Disability Law
Michigan Real Estate Law
Michigan Workers' Compensation Law
Military Veteran Law
Ninth Circuit Criminal Appeal
SCOTUSblog
Sentencing Law and Policy
Sixth Circuit Blog
Split Circuits
The Volokh Conspiracy
Wall Street Journal Law Blog


© 2005  Michael B. Skinner Law Offices Website
Blog Home
Michigan Appellate Law

Probation Fees


by Michael B. Skinner · Monday May 4, 2009 4:16 pm  PERMALINK
Trial courts are veterans at assessing costs at sentencing. However, they also shoot from the hip sometimes. MCL 771.3c sets a schedule for monthly payment of probation fees based on a defendant's income. In People v. Touchstone, Justice Markman dissented from an order denying leave to appeal because the trial court ordered the defendant to pay $10 a month when his income did not justify any monthly payment under the statute.

Only Justice Kelly joined Justice Markman's dissent. Was the issue unpreserved? Did the other justices figure, "Eh, what's $10?" The violation seems clear as framed in the dissent. Maybe it's because the trial court can order a higher payment if it justifies the order, so the justices figured that schedule is not really really mandatory.