In People v. Horton, No. 150815, the Michigan Supreme Court agreed to hear Defendant Horton’s appeal addressing the implications of a defendant’s unconditional no contest plea on the defendant’s ability to claim ineffective assistance of trial counsel upon appeal. While the Michigan Court of Appeals denied Defendant’s delayed application for leave to appeal to for lack of merit in the grounds presented, the Supreme Court agreed to hear three issues. First “whether the defendant’s unconditional no contest plea waived his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel based on trial counsel’s failure to make a motion to dismiss for a 180-day rule violation, MCL 780.131 and 780.133, in light of People v. Lown, 488 Mich 242, 267-270 (2011), or for constitutional speedy trial violations.” Second, “whether the defendant’s unconditional no contest plea waived his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel for trial counsel’s failure to inform the defendant that an unconditional no contest plea would waive his right to appeal on the basis of a 180-day rule violation or constitutional speedy trial violations.” Finally, “whether trial counsel’s failure to inform the defendant that his unconditional no contest plea would waive his right to appeal on the basis of a 180-day rule violation and constitutional speedy trial violation made defendant’s plea unknowing and involuntary.” The Court also invited the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan and the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan to file briefs amicus curiae.
Blogs
