FOLLOW US

"While an automatic stay does not necessarily prevent a court from commencing trial when an interlocutory appeal is pending and the question on review is collateral to the trial, the trial court here abused its discretion because the trial included the very evidence that was the subject of the application pending before this court," Justice Brian K. Zahra wrote for the majority.

The justices concluded, however, that interlocutory appeals are not "on par" with appeals from final judgments and do not divest trial judges of their jurisdiction over cases the way final appeals do.

As a result, the majority said the trial judge in Scott's case did not conduct a trial without authority to do so, so Scott's conviction and sentence is not automatically void but rather reviewed as a procedural error.

The high court sent the case back to the Court of Appeals to determine whether the witness testimony should have been admitted at trial and if it unfairly skewed the proceedings.

Justice Clement said in her dissent that she would have applied the Washington case to find the trial judge did not have jurisdiction over the aspects of the case involved in Scott's high court appeal, so the judge had no authority to hold the trial with the contested testimony.

As a result, Scott's trial, conviction and sentence are void, the dissenting justice argued.

Allowing the trial to go forward while an appeal was pending before the Michigan Supreme Court "risked necessitating a retrial should our Court have granted leave to appeal and ruled that the evidence should not be admitted," Justice Clement added.

Justice Clement said that it would be logical and promote judicial efficiency to apply a general rule that lower courts "lose subject-matter jurisdiction over a case while an appeal pends — whether that appeal is interlocutory or final."

The parties did not immediately reply to requests for comment Monday.

The state was represented by Joshua D. Abbott of the Macomb County Prosecutor's Office.

Scott was represented by Garrett Burton and Katherine Marcuz of the State Appellate Defender's Office.

The case is People of Michigan v. Ronald Scott, case number 164790, in the Michigan Supreme Court.