Motion to quash the information; Bindover; People v Anderson; Failure to allow defendant to complete his cross-examination of the victim; Probable cause

The court affirmed the circuit court’s order denying defendant’s motion to quash the information. The case arose from attempted armed robbery and attempted murder. Defendant argued “that the district court erred by binding him over for trial without allowing him to complete his cross-examination of the victim at the preliminary examination.” The court held that given all the circumstances, it could not “conclude that the district court abused its discretion by ending the preliminary examination when it did and binding defendant over for trial. While defendant had a right to cross-examine the victim, he has not shown that the [district] court committed reversible error in its handling of that right in this case.” This was “not to say that the [district] court would have necessarily erred had it decided to manage this rather unusual and challenging situation differently; ‘[a]t its core, an abuse of discretion standard acknowledges that there will be circumstances in which there will be no single correct outcome[.]’” Nor was “it to at all diminish the import of a defendant’s right to cross-examination at the preliminary-examination stage, or to suggest that courts should do anything but tread very carefully in limiting the exercise of that right—both for the sake of the right itself, and in light of the downstream consequences that may attend its limitation. Given the law and the record before us, however, we do not see adequate grounds to disrupt the district court’s bindover decision in this case or, correspondingly, the circuit court’s denial of defendant’s motion to quash.”