Legal Opinion
People v. Bolduc
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided October 28, 2004No. Docket 244970PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOEKSTRA, PJ.
This case is before us by order of our Supreme Court, which, in lieu of granting leave to appeal, remanded the case to this Court for consideration as on leave granted. People v Bolduc, 467 Mich 900 (2002). In this case, we are required to further define what is permissible conduct by the police when conducting a knock and talk procedure.1 In People v Frohriep, 247 Mich App 692; 637 NW2d 562 (2001), we determined that the knock and talk procedure itself is not unconstitutional, but we also concluded that the knock and talk procedure is subject to judicial review to determine…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Florida v. RoyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- People v. TierneyMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
- People v. BarbarichMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
- People v. AntwineMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
- People v. CorrMichigan Court of Appeals · 2010
- People v. NguyenMichigan Court of Appeals · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.