Motion to disqualify the prosecutor’s office from trying defendant’s case based on a conflict of interest or the appearance of impropriety; People v Mayhew; People v Doyle; People v Cline; Whether the separation-of-powers doctrine (Const. 1963, art. 3, § 2) prevents trial courts from ruling on such a motion; MCL 49.160; Principle that a prosecutor is a constitutional officer; Const. 1963, art. 7, § 4; People v Morrow; People v Muniz; The trial court’s authority to appoint a special prosecutor; People v Herri

Holding that the trial court possessed the authority to determine whether plaintiff-prosecutor’s office should be disqualified from handling defendant’s case, but erred by finding that a conflict of interest required disqualification of the entire prosecutor’s office, the court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Defendant was charged with open murder for shooting and killing the victim during a physical altercation. The trial court granted his motion to disqualify the prosecutor’s office based on separate conversations defendant had with an assistant prosecutor and a legal secretary prior to the shooting. On appeal, the court rejected the prosecution’s argument that the separation-of-powers doctrine prevents trial courts from ruling on motions to disqualify prosecutors from trying cases. It noted that “a trial court’s ‘inherent power is not governed so much by rule or statute, but by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.’” In addition, “trial courts have the ‘authority to direct and control the proceedings before them.’” However, the court agreed with the prosecution that the trial court erred by finding a conflict of interest required disqualification of the entire prosecutor’s office. It noted that neither the legal secretary nor the assistant prosecutor were involved in prosecuting the case, and that even assuming the assistant prosecutor “had ‘a personal, financial, or emotional interest in the litigation or a personal relationship with the accused’ on the basis of his phone call with defendant, caselaw does not support the disqualification of the” entire office.