People v. Lunsford

499 Mich. 971

Opinion

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s March 8, 2016 order is considered, and it is granted. We vacate our order dated March 8, 2016. On reconsideration, the application for leave to appeal the June 24, 2015 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 Kent Circuit Court to determine whether the court would have imposed a materially different sentence under the sentencing procedure described in People v Lockridge, 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 sentence absent the unconstitutional restraint on its discretion, it may affirm the original sentence. If, however, the trial court determines that it would not have imposed the same sentence absent the unconstitutional restraint on its discretion, it shall resentence the defendant. In all other respects, leave to appeal is denied, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should he reviewed by this Court. We do not retain jurisdiction.