People v. Clark

877 N.W.2d 735, 499 Mich. 913
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Clark. Read the opinion of the Court — 498 Mich. 858
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided May 2, 2016·No. No. 152960; Court of Appeals No. 329515·Published

Opinion

Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we remand this case to the Berrien Circuit Court to determine whether the court would have imposed a materially different sentence under the sentencing procedure described in People v Lockridgey 498 Mich 358 (2015). On remand, the trial court shall follow the procedure described in Part VI of our opinion. If the trial court determines that it would have imposed the same sentences absent the unconstitutional constraint on its discretion, it may reaffirm the original sentence. If, however, the trial court determines that it would not have imposed the same sentence absent the unconstitutional constraint on its discretion, it shall resen-tence the defendant. 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. We do not retain jurisdiction.

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

People v. Clark, 877 N.W.2d 735, 499 Mich. 913 (Mich. 2016).

877 N.W.2d 735 (People v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Lockridge
870 N.W.2d 502 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2015)