Christopher Murray

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Christopher Murray
Image of Christopher Murray
Michigan 1st District Court of Appeals
Tenure

2002 - Present

Term ends

2027

Years in position

23

Compensation

Base salary

$186,310

Elections and appointments
Last elected

November 3, 2020

Appointed

2002

Education

Bachelor's

Hillsdale College, 1985

Law

University of Detroit, Mercy School of Law, 1990

Contact

Christopher Murray is a judge of the Michigan 1st District Court of Appeals. He assumed office in 2002. His current term ends on January 1, 2027.

Murray ran for re-election for judge of the Michigan 1st District Court of Appeals. He won in the general election on November 3, 2020.

Additionally, in May 2015, Murray was appointed by the Michigan Supreme Court to serve as a judge on the Michigan Court of Claims. He was re-appointed in 2019. This role is in addition to his appellate court duties. His term expired on May 1, 2021.[1][2]

Education

Murray received his undergraduate degree from Hillsdale College in 1985 and his J.D. from the University of Detroit School of Law in 1990.[3][4]

Career

Awards and associations

  • Member, Board of Directors, Catholic Lawyers’ Society
  • Member, Board of Directors, Detroit Metropolitan Bar Association
  • Member, Board of Advisors, Michigan Chapter of the Federalist Society
  • Member, Michigan Board of Law Examiners
  • Member, University of Detroit Mercy Inns of Court [3]

Elections

2020

See also: Michigan intermediate appellate court elections, 2020

General election

General election for Michigan 1st District Court of Appeals (3 seats)

Incumbent Karen Fort Hood, incumbent Christopher Murray, and incumbent Anica Letica won election in the general election for Michigan 1st District Court of Appeals on November 3, 2020.

Candidate
%
Votes
Silhouette Placeholder Image.png
Karen Fort Hood (Nonpartisan)
 
37.9
 
594,032
Image of Christopher Murray
Christopher Murray (Nonpartisan)
 
31.8
 
497,982
Silhouette Placeholder Image.png
Anica Letica (Nonpartisan)
 
30.3
 
475,710

Total votes: 1,567,724
Candidate Connection = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.

Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Campaign finance

2014

See also: Michigan judicial elections, 2014
Murray ran for re-election to the First District Court of Appeals.
General: He was unopposed in the general election on November 4, 2014. [5] 

Campaign themes

2020

Ballotpedia survey responses

See also: Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection

Christopher Murray did not complete Ballotpedia's 2020 Candidate Connection survey.

Noteworthy cases

Martinko v. Whitmer (2020)

See also: Lawsuits about state actions and policies in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 2020-2021

Michigan House of Representatives and Michigan Senate v. Gretchen Whitmer: On May 6, Republicans in the Michigan House and Senate filed a lawsuit challenging Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's (D) emergency declarations issued to combat the novel coronavirus. The emergency declarations have been the source of several executive orders issued by Whitmer in response to the coronavirus pandemic, including the state's stay-at-home order. The lawsuit claims that Whitmer exceeded her authority under two laws that formed the basis of her emergency declaration—the 1976 Emergency Management Act and the 1945 Emergency Powers of the Governor Act.[6]

On May 21, Court of Claims Judge Cynthia Diane Stephens ruled against the Michigan legislature, dismissing the lawsuit. She wrote that Gov. Whitmer exceeded her authority under the 1976 law but not the 1945 law.[7]

On May 22, the Legislature asked the state Supreme Court to take up the case.[8]

RMGN and the Court of Appeals

In 2008, Reform Michigan Government Now (RMGN) put forward a proposal to reduce the Michigan Court of Appeals from 28 to 21 judges, based on term expiration dates, which would have shifted the court's political power from the Republicans to the Democrats. However, the proposal failed. Had the proposal passed, the court's political makeup would have changed from 16 Republican judges and 12 Democratic judges to 10 Republican judges and 11 Democratic judges--thereby eliminating six Republican judges and one Democratic judge. The judges targeted by the RMGN proposal were: Pat Donofrio, Joel Hoekstra, Donald Owens, David Sawyer, William Whitbeck, Kurtis Wilder and Helene White--the only Democrat affected by these suggested removals.[9]

Court rejects bid to remove judges in Kilpatrick case

According to the Detroit News, the Michigan Court of Appeals rejected a Wayne County Prosecutor's effort to remove every judge in the city's 36th District Court from overseeing proceedings in the criminal case against former Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. With that ruling, the court discarded any idea of impropriety on the entire bench. In an opinion authored by Kirsten Frank Kelly, and signed by Kurtis Wilder and Christopher Murray: "That the judges of the 36th District Court may have relationships with witnesses beyond those prescribed in the court rule does not warrant recusal, in absence of showing bias (and none is alleged), because the role of the judge in a preliminary exam is not to gauge guilt or innocence, and generally does not require making credibility determinations."[10]

Michigan Fracking Ban Initiative (2018)

See also: Committee to Ban Fracking in Michigan v. Secretary of State

The Committee to Ban Fracking in Michigan and LuAnne Kozma filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson arguing that the secretary of state has no authority to reject an initiative due to the election date reference on the petition. Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson argued that the election at which the proponent intends the initiative to appear for needs to be specified on the petition. Judge Christopher Murray ruled in favor of plaintiffs that the initiative petition was "facially compliant with all statutory requirements" and that the secretary of state had to accept signatures from the committee.

See also


External links

Footnotes