The Court of Appeals sided with the state; review continued alongside the companion Edwards case.
With Detroit Justice Center, ACLU of Michigan, Michigan State Planning Body, and Legal Services Association of Michigan, we argued that MCL 769.1k(1)(b)(iii) violates separation of powers by handing judges a legislative taxing function, and violates due process by giving judges a financial incentive to convict. The Court of Appeals held there was no due process violation because Johnson hadn't shown a "direct correspondence" between his own case and court revenue — missing, we argued, that the statute's entire design ties court survival to conviction and cost revenue. Johnson was reviewed by the Michigan Supreme Court concurrently with Edwards; both were denied leave to appeal on July 7, 2023.
Briefs, letters, guides, and other resources tied to this action.