Opinion
SC: 162686 COA: 355361
10-08-2021
PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eddie Burt WAGLE, Defendant-Appellant.
Order
By order of August 3, 2021, the prosecuting attorney was directed to answer the application for leave to appeal the December 23, 2020 order of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the answer having been received, the application for leave to appeal is again considered. Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the December 23, 2020 order of the Court of Appeals, and we REMAND this case to the Berrien Circuit Court for reconsideration of the defendant's motion for relief from judgment. The motion for relief from judgment is based, in part, on an affidavit that was not previously presented to the trial court. Therefore, the motion is not procedurally barred under MCR 6.502(G)(1) because it is "based on ... a claim of new evidence that was not discovered before the first" motion for relief from judgment. MCR 6.502(G)(2). Further, the circuit court erred in applying People v. Cress , 468 Mich. 678, 664 N.W.2d 174 (2003), to an analysis of whether the defendant's motion was successive under MCR 6.502(G). See People v. Swain , 499 Mich. 920, 878 N.W.2d 476 (2016). Cress does not apply to the procedural threshold of MCR 6.502(G)(2), as the plain text of the court rule does not require that a defendant satisfy all elements of the test.