People of Michigan v. Harold Lamont Walker

Order Michigan Supreme Court
Lansing, Michigan
June 1, 2018 Stephen J. Markman,
Chief Justice
155198 Brian K. Zahra
Bridget M. McCormack
David F. Viviano
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Richard H. Bernstein
Plaintiff-Appellee, Kurtis T. Wilder
v SC: 155198 Elizabeth T. Clement,
COA: 327063 Justices
Wayne CC: 14-007222-FH
HAROLD LAMONT WALKER,
Defendant-Appellant.
_____________________________________/
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 1, 2016
judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral
argument on whether to grant the application or take other action. MCR 7.305(H)(1).
The appellant shall file a supplemental brief within 42 days of the date of this
order addressing: (1) whether the defendant is entitled to a new trial based on the trial
judge’s comments to the jury in lieu of the standard “deadlocked jury” instruction,
M Crim JI 3.12; (2) whether Offense Variable 19 (OV 19), MCL 777.49, was improperly
assigned 10 points for interference with the administration of justice, see People v Hardy,
494 Mich. 430, 438 (2013), and People v Adams, 430 Mich. 679, 689 (1988); and (3) if
OV 19 was misscored, whether the defendant is entitled to resentencing before a different
judge based on the judge’s verbal exchange with the defendant at sentencing. In addition
to the brief, the appellant shall electronically file an appendix conforming to MCR
7.312(D)(2). In the brief, citations to the record must provide the appendix page numbers
as required by MCR 7.312(B)(1). The appellee shall file a supplemental brief within 21
days of being served with the appellant’s brief. The appellee shall also electronically file
an appendix, or in the alternative, stipulate to the use of the appendix filed by the
appellant. A reply, if any, must be filed by the appellant within 14 days of being served
with the appellee’s brief. The parties should not submit mere restatements of their
application papers.
The Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan and the Criminal Defense
Attorneys of Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups
interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court
for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
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.
June 1, 2018
a0529
Clerk