Motion to set aside juvenile adjudication; People v Butka

On remand from the Michigan Supreme Court for reconsideration in light of Butka, the court vacated the trial court’s order denying defendant’s motion to set aside his juvenile adjudication of CSC III and remanded. The “trial court largely rested its decision to deny [his] motion on the basis of the victim’s opposition to it.” The court found that it appeared “that the trial court did what the Michigan Supreme Court stated that it could not do: give the victim a veto power that frustrated the underlying purpose of the act and deprived defendant of a meaningful opportunity to have his application considered on the merits.” It also concluded that “to the extent the trial court relied on the victim and her opposition as constituting the ‘public welfare,’ such a determination was improper under Butka. It was, therefore, an abuse of discretion for the trial court to deny defendant’s motion on the basis of the victim’s opposition to it.” Unlike in Butka, however, this case did “not involve a sufficiently developed record to decide as a matter of law whether defendant has established the elements necessary to reach a decision on the merits. Given the state of the record, the trial court should decide the issue, in light of Butka, in the first instance and give the parties the opportunity to present their arguments and any additional evidence.”