|
No. 131223, 131224
| The People of the State of Michigan, |
|
Donald A. Kuebler |
Plaintiff-Appellant, |
|
|
| v |
(Appeal from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
(Genesee - Neithercut, G.) |
|
|
| Michael David Keller, |
|
Neil C. Szabo |
Defendant-Appellee. |
|
|
| -------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
|
| The People of the State of Michigan, |
|
|
Plaintiff-Appellant, |
|
|
| v (Appeal from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
(Genesee - Neithercut, G.) |
|
|
| Melinda Sue Keller, |
|
|
| Defendant-Appellee. |
|
|
| __________________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiff-Appellant's Application for Leave to Appeal>>
Plaintiff-Appellant's Supplemental Brief>>
Defendants-Appellees' Brief in Opposition to Leave to Appeal>>
Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Background
Police received an anonymous tip that Michael and Melinda Keller were running a large-scale marijuana growing and sale operation out of their home. Police watched the house for several days without noting anything of significance. Ultimately, they checked the Kellers’ trash and discovered a small remnant of a burnt marijuana cigarette on a pizza box. Based on that find and the anonymous tip, the police obtained a search warrant the next day. They searched the home and recovered 172 grams of marijuana. The Kellers were both charged with maintaining a drug house; Michael Keller was also charged with possession with intent to deliver marijuana, while his wife Melinda Keller was charged only with an additional count of marijuana possession. The Kellers filed a motion to suppress the drugs as fruits of a warrant that violated the standards set forth in MCL 780.653, which governs warrant requests based on anonymous tips. MCL 780.653 states that the person seeking the warrant must submit an affidavit that provides “affirmative allegations from which the magistrate may conclude that the person spoke with personal knowledge of the information and either that the unnamed person is credible or that the information is reliable.” The trial judge ruled that the anonymous tip was not a valid basis for the search warrant, but nevertheless denied the Kellers’ motion, concluding that, under People v Hawkins, 468 Mich 488 (2003), exclusion of the evidence was improper. But the defense could argue to the jury that the police intentionally violated Michigan law and deliberately misled the magistrate to obtain the search warrant, the trial judge ruled. The prosecutor sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, arguing that such an argument to the jury was improper. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded in a published opinion, with one judge dissenting. The majority held that the trial court erroneously denied the Kellers’ motion to suppress. Accordingly, the majority declined to decide whether allegations of police misconduct could be argued to the jury. The prosecutor appeals.
Top of Page
|
