Opinion
SC: 164145 COA: 353182
12-09-2022
PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darnell RUSH, Defendant-Appellant.
Order
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 13, 2022 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of People v Parks , 510 Mich ––––, ––– N.W.2d ––––, 2022 WL 3008548 (2022) (Docket No. 162086). In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
We do not retain jurisdiction.
Zahra, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I dissent from the part of this Court's order remanding the case for reconsideration in light of People v Parks , 510 Mich ––––, ––– N.W.2d ––––, 2022 WL 3008548 (2022) (Docket No. 162086), which held that Const 1963, art. 1, § 16 bars mandatory life-without-parole sentences for 18-year-old homicide offenders. Because defendant was over the age of 18 at the time he committed first-degree murder, he is not entitled to relief under Parks. Therefore, I would deny leave on all the issues raised in defendant's application.
Viviano, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part).
For the reasons stated in Chief Justice CLEMENT ’s dissent in People v Parks , 510 Mich ––––, ––– N.W.2d ––––, 2022 WL 3008548 (2022) (Docket No. 162086), I do not believe that a mandatory sentence of life without parole for a defendant who committed first-degree murder when he was over the age of 17 is unconstitutional. Therefore, I would deny leave to appeal on all of the issues raised by defendant.