Order Michigan Supreme Court
Lansing, Michigan
October 3, 2014 Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice
149123 Michael F. Cavanagh
Stephen J. Markman
Mary Beth Kelly
Brian K. Zahra
Bridget M. McCormack
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, David F. Viviano,
Plaintiff-Appellant, Justices
v SC: 149123
COA: 321026
Oakland CC: 13-246791-FC
WILLIAM MICHAEL DHONDT,
Defendant-Appellee.
____________________________________/
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 27, 2014 order
of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the question presented
is moot.
ZAHRA, J. (concurring).
I concur with the Court’s decision to deny leave to appeal because the issue is
moot. I write separately to address the trial court’s erroneous interpretation of MCL
780.761. At trial, the victim testified and was cross-examined in the prosecution’s case-
in-chief. Following that testimony, the trial court ordered that he still be subject to
sequestration. This was an error, however, because MCL 780.761 provides, in relevant
part: “If the victim is going to be called as a witness, the court may, for good cause
shown, order the victim to be sequestered until the victim first testifies. The victim shall
not be sequestered after he or she first testifies.” (Emphasis added.) Under the plain
language of this statute, a victim can no longer be sequestered, regardless of whether the
victim might potentially be called to testify a second time, once the victim first testifies.
In this case, the victim first testified in the prosecution’s case-in-chief, at which point his
sequestration should have ended. Accordingly, the trial court’s order to continue the
victim’s sequestration was contrary to MCL 780.761.
I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
October 3, 2014
h0930
Clerk