Whether Michigan's personal protection order statute unconstitutionally deprives the accused of meaningful due process

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Michigan law (MCL 600.2950(4)) Tequires the Court to issue a personal protection order whenever there is reason to believe the person to be enjoined may commit an act to be enjoined. Further the Statute limits consideration only to that evidence that supports the issuance of the PPO. Does this statute unconstitutionally deprive the accused of ; meaningful due process? . , 2. Inthe instant case the entry of the PPO took from Mr. Brent his ability to reside in his own home, and obtain any of his personal papers and possessions that were in the home. Is this an unlawful taking without compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment? 3. Although the PPO expires by its own terms, once issued the accused is forever listed as a domestic violence offender in the same manner as if he was convicted in a criminal proceeding. Michigan provides no mechanism to remove an expired PPO from the Law | Enforcement Information Network database. Does the collateral consequences of the PPO overcome any claims of mootness? , 4. Ifthis case has become moot, is the proper remedy to vacate all of the lower court orders and remand to the original Circuit Court with instructions to dismiss? .