People of Michigan v. Rodolfo Michael Sanchez

CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedMay 26, 2020
Docket160032
StatusPublished

This text of People of Michigan v. Rodolfo Michael Sanchez (People of Michigan v. Rodolfo Michael Sanchez) 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. Rodolfo Michael Sanchez, (Mich. 2020).

Opinion

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

May 26, 2020 Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

160032 & (40)(41)(42) 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: 160032 COA: 343834 Saginaw CC: 16-042629-FH RODOLFO MICHAEL SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion to amend the application is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the June 6, 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 REMAND this case to the Saginaw Circuit Court for the appointment of substitute appellate counsel, in light of Halbert v Michigan, 545 US 605 (2005). The defendant’s previous appellate attorneys allowed the time limits for appellate review to expire without seeking direct review of the defendant’s plea-based convictions or, alternatively, filing a motion to withdraw that met the requirements of Anders v California, 386 US 738, 744 (1967). On remand, substitute counsel, once appointed, may file an application for leave to appeal in the Court of Appeals for consideration under the standard for direct appeals, and/or any appropriate post-conviction motions in the circuit court, within six months of the date of the circuit court’s order appointing counsel. 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. The motions to remand for evidentiary hearings are DENIED.

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. May 26, 2020 a0518 Clerk

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Halbert v. Michigan
545 U.S. 605 (Supreme Court, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
People of Michigan v. Rodolfo Michael Sanchez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-of-michigan-v-rodolfo-michael-sanchez-mich-2020.