From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Lewis

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Oct 28, 2015
498 Mich. 901 (Mich. 2015)

Opinion

Docket No. 149463. COA No. 313451.

2015-10-28

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Terrell Dion LEWIS, Defendant–Appellant.


Order

On order of the Court, the motion for leave to file pro per supplemental application is GRANTED. By order of October 28, 2014, the application for leave to appeal the April 17, 2014 judgment of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in People v. Lockridge (Docket No. 149073). The case having been decided on July 29, 2015, 498 Mich. 358, 870 N.W.2d 502 (2015), the application is again considered. 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 Wayne Circuit Court to determine whether the court would have imposed a materially different sentence under the sentencing procedure described in Lockridge. 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.


Summaries of

People v. Lewis

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Oct 28, 2015
498 Mich. 901 (Mich. 2015)
Case details for

People v. Lewis

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Terrell Dion…

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan.

Date published: Oct 28, 2015

Citations

498 Mich. 901 (Mich. 2015)
498 Mich. 901

Citing Cases

Lewis v. Trierweiler

The Michigan Supreme Court remanded the case to the state trial court to determine whether a different…