MacOmb Cnty. Prosecuting Attorney v. Irwin (In Re Irwin)

928 N.W.2d 208

• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Decided: June 12, 2019
• Docket: SC: 158077; COA: 342963
• Status: Published

Opinion

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 7, 2018 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration, as on leave granted, of whether the Parole Board clearly abused its discretion by granting parole. We note that a similar issue was presented in In re Parole of Layman (Docket No. 157104), which we remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted by order dated April 3, 2018, and which was decided in In re Parole of Layman , unpublished per curiam opinion of the Court of Appeals, issued September 20, 2018 (Docket No. 341112). Further, we note that a similar issue is presented in In re Parole of Plunkett (Docket No. 159032), which we remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted by order dated June 12, 2019. In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

Viviano, J. did not participate because he presided in the circuit court as the sentencing judge in the underlying criminal case.