People v. Raisanen

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that blanket exclusion of potential jurors who had received traffic citations was improper under Michigan rule governing challenges for cause
• holding that blanket exclusion of potential jurors who had received traffic citations was improper under Michigan rule governing challenges for cause
• explaining that under a former version of MCR 2.511(E)(10), it was insufficient that the prospective jurors had been charged with traffic offenses; the challenging party was required to show that the offense rose to the level of a crime and was brought by that prosecutor’s office

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).