COA 375314 PEOPLE OF MI V DAVID OCTAVIANO SILVA III Opinion - Per Curiam - Unpublished 9/28/2026

If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to
revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports.
-1-
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N
C O U R T O F A P P E A L S
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
UNPUBLISHED
September 28, 2026
10:51 AM
v No. 375314
Ingham Circuit Court
DAVID OCTAVIANO SILVA III, LC No. 21-000098-FH
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: MARIANI, P.J., and FEENEY and TREBILCOCK, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant pleaded no contest to one count of second-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC
II), MCL 750.520c(1)(a); MCL 750.520c(2)(b) (sexual contact; victim under 13 years old,
defendant over 17 years old). He was sentenced to 365 days in jail and five years’ probation, the
conditions of which included restrictions on contact with his two minor children. Defendant
appeals by leave granted,1 challenging the terms of his probation. We dismiss this appeal as moot.
“Whether a case is moot is a threshold issue that a court addresses before it reaches the
substantive issues of the case itself.” People v Richmond, 486 Mich 29, 35; 782 NW2d 187 (2010),
amended on another issue 784 NW2d 204 (Mich 2010). “Mootness occurs when an event has
occurred that renders it impossible for the court to grant relief.” People v Wills, ___ Mich App
___, ___; ___ NW3d ___ (Docket No. 378071); slip op at 5 (quotation marks and citation omitted).
Accordingly, an issue is moot if “any judgment on the matter would lack practical legal effect,”
People v Smith, 502 Mich 624, 631; 918 NW2d 718 (2018), or it is “impossible for the reviewing
court to fashion a remedy to the controversy,” People v Thue, 336 Mich App 35, 39; 969 NW2d
346 (2021) (quotation marks and citation omitted). This Court will generally not decide moot
issues unless the “issue is one of public significance that is likely to recur, yet evade judicial
review . . . .” Id. (quotation marks and citation omitted).
1 People v Silva, unpublished order of the Court of Appeals, entered May 28, 2025 (Docket
No. 375314).

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
In this case, defendant challenges his probation condition restricting contact with his
children; however, defendant acknowledges that contact with his children was subsequently
restored and that there is no practical relief that we could offer him at this time. Because defendant
is no longer subject to the challenged condition of his probation, this issue is moot. See also People
v Anderson, 284 Mich App 11, 17; 772 NW2d 792 (2009) (deeming moot the defendant’s
challenge to a probation condition that he was no longer subject to). Therefore, we dismiss this
appeal as moot.
/s/ Philip P. Mariani
/s/ Kathleen A. Feeney
/s/ Christopher M. Trebilcock

-- 2 of 2 --