Prior report: Mich.App.,
2011 WL 1902020.
Order
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 19, 2011 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall address: (1) whether the “attorney judgment rule,” as applied in a related case involving a claim of legal malpractice made by the defendant against his trial counsel in this criminal case, can be applied under a collateral estoppel theory to bar substantive review of evidence adduced at a hearing ordered by this Court to determine whether the defendant was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel and, if not, (2) whether, in light of the record developed on remand, the defendant is entitled to a new trial on the ground that he was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel, and (3) whether the defendant is entitled to a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence.
The Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan and the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.