People v. McBride

Order                                                                                         Michigan Supreme Court
                                                                                                    Lansing, Michigan

  July 10, 2006                                                                                           Clifford W. Taylor,
                                                                                                                  Chief Justice

  131580 & (14)(15)                                                                                     Michael F. Cavanagh
                                                                                                        Elizabeth A. Weaver
                                                                                                               Marilyn Kelly
  PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,	                                                                       Maura D. Corrigan
            Plaintiff-Appellant,                                                                        Robert P. Young, Jr.
                                                                                                        Stephen J. Markman,
                                                                                                                       Justices
  v       	                                                          SC: 131580
                                                                     COA: 269376
                                                                     Macomb CC: 05-004049-FC
  MARY ANN McBRIDE,

             Defendant-Appellee. 

  _________________________________________/

         On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED.
  The application for leave to appeal the June 27, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is
  considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we
  REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted. The
  motion to stay trial proceedings is also considered, and it is GRANTED. On motion of a
  party or on its own motion, the Court of Appeals may modify, set aside, or place
  conditions on the stay if it appears that the appeal is not being vigorously prosecuted or if
  other appropriate grounds appear.

         We do not retain jurisdiction.

         KELLY, J., dissents and states as follows:
         We should deny leave to appeal. At the hearing conducted pursuant to People v
  Walker (On Rehearing), 374 Mich 331 (1965), the trial judge suppressed the
  incriminating statement that defendant made to the police. The judge did so after
  viewing the videotape of defendant’s police interview. Defendant is a deaf-mute.

         The judge found that defendant was not advised of her rights under Miranda v
  Arizona, 384 US 436 (1966), in a manner that she understood. The prosecution asserts
  otherwise. It has not furnished us the videotape. Without that tape, the prosecution
  cannot demonstrate to us, any more than it did to the Court of Appeals, that the judge’s
  findings of fact were clearly erroneous. I would deny leave to appeal and allow the case
  to go to trial.




                            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.
                            July 10, 2006                       _________________________________________
         d0710                                                                  Clerk