Order Michigan Supreme Court
Lansing, Michigan
June 4, 2010 Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice
139664 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver
Maura D. Corrigan
Robert P. Young, Jr.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman
Plaintiff-Appellee, Diane M. Hathaway,
Justices
v SC: 139664
COA: 282690
St. Joseph CC: 07-014245-FC
DANNIE GAYHEART,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________/
On May 11, 2010, the Court heard oral argument on the application for leave to
appeal the July 30, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the
application is again considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the
questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
CORRIGAN, J. (concurring.)
I concur in the Court’s order denying leave to appeal. I write separately to express
my agreement with a majority of other states that territorial jurisdiction presents an issue
of subject-matter, rather than personal, jurisdiction, which cannot be waived. See People
v Betts, 34 Cal 4th 1039, 1049 (2005); State v Willoughby, 181 Ariz 530, 538, n 7 (1995);
People v McLaughlin, 80 NY2d 466, 471 (1992); see also LaFave, Criminal Procedure
(3d ed), § 16.4(a), n 2, p 830 (“Since territorial jurisdictional limits operate to restrict the
subject matter over which the court can exercise authority, they are treated procedurally
as presenting issues of subject matter jurisdiction.”). Further, I emphasize that the record
in this case clearly established that the state of Michigan had territorial jurisdiction to
prosecute defendant pursuant to MCL 762.2. After a six-day trial, a jury convicted
defendant of both first-degree premeditated murder, MCL 750.316(1)(a), and first-degree
felony murder, MCL 750.316(1)(b). The record reveals that the prosecutor presented
ample evidence that defendant committed at least one element of each charged offense in
Michigan. This evidence, which the jury found persuasive, was more than sufficient to
establish territorial jurisdiction under MCL 762.2(1)(a) and (2)(a). Accordingly, I agree
with the Court of Appeals that “even though the evidence suggested that the fatal blows
2
were struck in Indiana, and despite the discovery of the victim’s body in Indiana, the trial
court had territorial jurisdiction to try defendant for murder under the laws of Michigan.”
People v Gayheart, 285 Mich App 202, 220 (2009).
KELLY, C.J., would grant leave to appeal.
I, Corbin R. Davis, 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.
June 4, 2010 _________________________________________
s0601 Clerk