Legal Opinion

People v. Pinkney

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 1, 2018No. 154374PublishedCited by 62 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtViviano, J.

**263The issue in this case is whether defendant can be convicted of election-law forgery under MCL 168.937. The Court of Appeals upheld defendant's convictions under that provision, holding that MCL 168.937 creates the substantive offense of election-law forgery. We disagree and hold that MCL 168.937 is nothing more than a penalty provision-it does not create a substantive offense. Because defendant cannot be convicted under a statute that does not set forth a crime, we reverse and remand for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Between…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Connecticut National Bank v. GermainSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Lamie v. United States TrusteeSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  4. Marx v. General Revenue Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2013
  5. Hobbs v. McLeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1886

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by62 opinions

  1. Santander Consumer USA Inc v. State TreasurerMichigan Supreme Court · 2018
  2. People of Michigan v. Edward Michael CzuprynskiMichigan Court of Appeals · 2018
  3. LandWatch Lane County v. Lane CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
  4. American Civil Liberties Union Of Michigan V Calhoun CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 2022
  5. American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan v. Calhoun CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 2022

57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API