People v. Pinkney
Michigan Supreme Court
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
- Connecticut National Bank v. GermainSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Lamie v. United States TrusteeSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Marx v. General Revenue Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Hobbs v. McLeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- Santander Consumer USA Inc v. State TreasurerMichigan Supreme Court · 2018
- People of Michigan v. Edward Michael CzuprynskiMichigan Court of Appeals · 2018
- LandWatch Lane County v. Lane CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
- American Civil Liberties Union Of Michigan V Calhoun CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 2022
- American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan v. Calhoun CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 2022
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.