People v. Lankey

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Lankey

497 N.W.2d 571, 198 Mich. App. 187

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 2, 1993

DocketDocket 126668, 154456

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 497 N.W.2d 571 (People v. Lankey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Lankey, 497 N.W.2d 571, 198 Mich. App. 187 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

AFTER REMAND

Before: Corrigan, P.J., and Michael J. Kelly and Griffin, JJ.

Per Curiam.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of five counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, MCL 750.520b(l)(a); MSA 28.788(2) (l)(a), involving his then six-year-old granddaughter. Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of two to ten years in prison. The minimum sentence recommended by the sentencing guidelines is between eight and ten years.

In our previous opinion, People v Lankey, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, decided September 22, 1992 (Docket Nos. 126668, 154456), we affirmed defendant’s convictions but remanded the case to the trial court for reconsideration of the sentences in light of People v Milbourn, 435 Mich 630; 461 NW2d 1 (1990). On remand, the trial court ruled that Milbourn did not apply to sentences that are less than recommended by the guidelines. This ruling is erroneous and contrary to our remand instructions.

The prosecutor contends that defendant’s sentences are disproportionately lenient given the gravity of the offense. We agree and accordingly vacate defendant’s sentences and remand for re-sentencing. The resentencing shall occur before a different judge. People v Evans, 156 Mich App 68, 72-73; 401 NW2d 312 (1986). Also see People v Fisher (After Second Remand), 190 Mich App 598, 608-609; 476 NW2d 762 (1991), lv gtd 439 Mich 1002 (1992). We do not retain jurisdiction.

Convictions affirmed, sentences vacated, and case remanded for resentencing.

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

AFTER REMAND

Before: Corrigan, P.J., and Michael J. Kelly and Griffin, JJ.

Per Curiam.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of five counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, MCL 750.520b(l)(a); MSA 28.788(2) (l)(a), involving his then six-year-old granddaughter. Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of two to ten years in prison. The minimum sentence recommended by the sentencing guidelines is between eight and ten years.

In our previous opinion, People v Lankey, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, decided September 22, 1992 (Docket Nos. 126668, 154456), we affirmed defendant’s convictions but remanded the case to the trial court for reconsideration of the sentences in light of People v Milbourn, 435 Mich 630; 461 NW2d 1 (1990). On remand, the trial court ruled that Milbourn did not apply to sentences that are less than recommended by the guidelines. This ruling is erroneous and contrary to our remand instructions.

The prosecutor contends that defendant’s sentences are disproportionately lenient given the gravity of the offense. We agree and accordingly vacate defendant’s sentences and remand for re-sentencing. The resentencing shall occur before a different judge. People v Evans, 156 Mich App 68, 72-73; 401 NW2d 312 (1986). Also see People v Fisher (After Second Remand), 190 Mich App 598, 608-609; 476 NW2d 762 (1991), lv gtd 439 Mich 1002 (1992). We do not retain jurisdiction.

Convictions affirmed, sentences vacated, and case remanded for resentencing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

497 N.W.2d 571, 198 Mich. App. 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lankey-michctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack