From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Norgren

Court of Appeals of Michigan
Nov 6, 2024
No. 372332 (Mich. Ct. App. Nov. 6, 2024)

Opinion

372332

11-06-2024

PEOPLE OF MICHIGAN v. CINDY SUE NORGREN


LC No. 23-045870-FH

Kathleen Jansen Presiding Judge Michael F. Gadola Adrienne N. Young Judges

ORDER

The application for leave to appeal is DENIED for lack of merit in the grounds presented.

Young, J., concurs in the denial of leave as to Issue I but would remand on Issue II for the trial court to either conduct a resentencing or justify its discretionary consecutive sentence in accordance with People v Norfleet, 317 Mich.App. 649; 897 N.W.2d 195 (2016). Before making the sentences consecutive, the court stated on the record that it had "stated the reasons why it was consecutive [earlier]." But the earlier explanation for the sentence could just as easily explain why the sentencing judge went to the very top of the guidelines for the embezzlement charge. Without more, this record is insufficient to explain the "strong medicine" that is a consecutive sentence. People v Chambers, 430 Mich. 217, 229, 231; 421 N.W.2d 903 (1988).


Summaries of

People v. Norgren

Court of Appeals of Michigan
Nov 6, 2024
No. 372332 (Mich. Ct. App. Nov. 6, 2024)
Case details for

People v. Norgren

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF MICHIGAN v. CINDY SUE NORGREN

Court:Court of Appeals of Michigan

Date published: Nov 6, 2024

Citations

No. 372332 (Mich. Ct. App. Nov. 6, 2024)