Summary
assessing Fourth Amendment reasonableness of GPS monitoring apart from classifying GPS monitoring as legislatively imposed sanction
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. FelizOpinion
Docket No. 152005. COA No. 317863.
03-29-2016
PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Kassem Mahmoud HALLAK, Defendant–Appellant.
Order
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 28, 2015 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE in part the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and we REMAND this case to the Eaton 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, 870 N.W.2d 502 (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 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.