People of Michigan v. Horace Demario Collins ( 2017 )


Menu:
  • Order                                                                                         Michigan Supreme Court
    Lansing, Michigan
    September 8, 2017                                                                                     Stephen J. Markman,
    Chief Justice
    Brian K. Zahra
    Bridget M. McCormack
    153952                                                                                                   David F. Viviano
    Richard H. Bernstein
    Joan L. Larsen
    Kurtis T. Wilder,
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,                                                                                     Justices
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v                                                                  SC: 153952
    COA: 327971
    Kent CC: 14-006374-FC
    HORACE DEMARIO COLLINS,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    _________________________________________/
    On January 24, 2017, the Court ordered oral argument on the application for leave
    to appeal the August 20, 2015 order of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the
    application is again considered. Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1) and in light of the
    prosecutor’s concession that the defendant in this case should receive relief under People
    v Lockidge, 
    498 Mich. 358
    (2015), we VACATE our order dated January 24, 2017 and, in
    lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Kent Circuit Court for
    consideration of the defendant’s issue regarding the assessment of court costs and to
    determine whether the court would have imposed a materially different sentence under
    the sentencing procedure described in Lockridge. 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 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 resentence 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.
    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.
    September 8, 2017
    s0905
    Clerk
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 153952

Filed Date: 9/8/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/9/2017