Summary
reversing this Court's holding that a due-process challenge like the one at bar was unpreserved—and thus subject to plain-error review—and remanding for this Court's "reconsideration under the standard for preserved constitutional error"
Summary of this case from People v. ProppOpinion
SC: 160320 COA: 323741
04-24-2020
PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johnny Ray KENNEDY, Defendant-Appellant.
Order
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 6, 2019 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE that part of the Court of Appeals judgment holding that the defendant’s constitutional challenge is unpreserved. "The Constitution guarantees a fair trial through the Due Process Clauses, but it defines the basic elements of a fair trial largely through the several provisions of the Sixth Amendment ...." Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 684-685, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Because a criminal defendant’s interest in expert assistance under People v. Kennedy , 502 Mich. 206, 228, 917 N.W.2d 355 (2018), is grounded in due process, and the defendant’s motion for expert assistance in the trial court asked for relief under U.S. Const., Am. VI, his due process challenge was preserved. We VACATE the remainder of the Court of Appeals judgment and REMAND this case for reconsideration under the standard for preserved constitutional error. People v. Anderson (After Remand) , 446 Mich. 392, 405-406, 521 N.W.2d 538 (1994).
We do not retain jurisdiction.