Introduction

The role that support animals may play in Michigan courtrooms deserves careful consideration. By flatly concluding that “a fully abled adult witness may not be accompanied by a support animal or support person while testifying,” People v Shorter, No. 338629, 2018 WL 2746384, at *6 (Mich Ct App June 7, 2018), the appellate court short-circuited Michigan judges’ ability to consider support animals on an individual basis, and instead adopted a onesize-fits-all rejection of this promising tool.2 Amici urges that this Court reconsider the lower court’s decision to ensure that any decision promotes truth-seeking and honors crime victims’ constitutional right to dignity and access to the courts.

Summary

The use of support animals in Michigan courtrooms requires careful examination. A prior ruling, People v Shorter, broadly stated that an adult witness without a disability could not have a support animal or person during testimony. This decision limited the discretion of Michigan judges to evaluate such requests on a case-by-case basis, instead applying a universal denial. It is recommended that the court review this decision to ensure that future rulings support the pursuit of truth and uphold the constitutional rights of crime victims to dignity and access to legal proceedings.

Introduction

The use of support animals in Michigan courtrooms requires careful thought. A previous court decision, People v Shorter (2018), broadly stated that "a fully abled adult witness may not be accompanied by a support animal or support person while testifying." This ruling prevented Michigan judges from evaluating the need for support animals on a case-by-case basis. Instead, it created a general rule against their use, limiting a potentially helpful tool. There is a strong recommendation for the Court to review this earlier decision. Such a review would help ensure that future decisions support the search for truth and uphold crime victims' constitutional rights to dignity and access to the legal system.

Introduction

The use of support animals in Michigan courtrooms needs careful thought. A previous court decision, People v. Shorter, stated that "a fully abled adult witness may not be accompanied by a support animal or support person while testifying." This ruling stopped Michigan judges from looking at each case individually when a support animal was requested. Instead, it created a blanket refusal for what could be a helpful tool. Legal groups are asking the current Court to review this decision. They believe any new decision should help find the truth and respect the constitutional rights of crime victims, ensuring they have dignity and access to the justice system.

Summary

Michigan courts are thinking about whether support animals can be in the courtroom. One court case said that adults who can fully take care of themselves cannot have a support animal or person with them when they speak in court. This decision stopped judges from looking at each case by itself. Instead, it said no to support animals for all adults.

Some groups are asking the court to look at this decision again. They want to make sure that whatever is decided helps find the truth. They also want to make sure that people who have been harmed by a crime can feel respected and use the courts, as the law allows.