People of Michigan v. Leander Kriegg Foster

Michigan Supreme Court

People of Michigan v. Leander Kriegg Foster

DecidedNovember 13, 2020

Docket159433

StatusPublished

This text of People of Michigan v. Leander Kriegg Foster (People of Michigan v. Leander Kriegg Foster) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People of Michigan v. Leander Kriegg Foster, (Mich. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

November 13, 2020 Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

159433 David F. Viviano, Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman Brian K. Zahra PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Richard H. Bernstein Plaintiff-Appellee, Elizabeth T. Clement Megan K. Cavanagh, Justices v SC: 159433 COA: 341060 Wayne CC: 94-006481-FC LEANDER KRIEGG FOSTER, Defendant-Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 19, 2019 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE the judgment of the Court of Appeals and REMAND this case to the Wayne Circuit Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this order. The defendant was not required to file a motion for relief from judgment to challenge his sentence for armed robbery, imposed concurrently to his sentence for a first-degree murder committed when he was under the age of 18. See People v Turner, 505 Mich 954 (2020) (Docket No. 158068). The trial court had jurisdiction to consider his arguments regarding his armed robbery sentence at the resentencing for first-degree murder held pursuant to MCL 769.25a and Miller v Alabama, 567 US 460 (2012). On remand, the trial court shall consider the defendant’s arguments regarding the validity of his armed robbery sentence and may exercise its discretion to resentence him for that conviction, in particular “if it finds that the sentence was based on a legal misconception that the defendant was required to serve a mandatory sentence of life without parole on the greater offense.” Turner, supra.

We do not retain jurisdiction.

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. November 13, 2020 t1110 Clerk

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

November 13, 2020 Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

159433 David F. Viviano, Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman Brian K. Zahra PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Richard H. Bernstein Plaintiff-Appellee, Elizabeth T. Clement Megan K. Cavanagh, Justices v SC: 159433 COA: 341060 Wayne CC: 94-006481-FC LEANDER KRIEGG FOSTER, Defendant-Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 19, 2019 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE the judgment of the Court of Appeals and REMAND this case to the Wayne Circuit Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this order. The defendant was not required to file a motion for relief from judgment to challenge his sentence for armed robbery, imposed concurrently to his sentence for a first-degree murder committed when he was under the age of 18. See People v Turner, 505 Mich 954 (2020) (Docket No. 158068). The trial court had jurisdiction to consider his arguments regarding his armed robbery sentence at the resentencing for first-degree murder held pursuant to MCL 769.25a and Miller v Alabama, 567 US 460 (2012). On remand, the trial court shall consider the defendant’s arguments regarding the validity of his armed robbery sentence and may exercise its discretion to resentence him for that conviction, in particular “if it finds that the sentence was based on a legal misconception that the defendant was required to serve a mandatory sentence of life without parole on the greater offense.” Turner, supra.

We do not retain jurisdiction.

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. November 13, 2020 t1110 Clerk

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

People of Michigan v. Leander Kriegg Foster, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-of-michigan-v-leander-kriegg-foster-mich-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack