From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Warrick

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Nov 29, 2017
501 Mich. 920 (Mich. 2017)

Opinion

SC: 152938 COA: 329137

11-29-2017

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mary Ellen WARRICK, Defendant-Appellant.


Order

By order of May 24, 2016, the application for leave to appeal the November 12, 2015 order of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in People v. Comer. On order of the Court, the case having been decided on June 23, 2017, 500 Mich. 278, 901 N.W.2d 553 (2017), the application is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the March 5, 2015 amended judgment of sentence, and we REMAND this case to the Macomb Circuit Court to reinstate the February 12, 2015 judgment of sentence. In Comer, we held that correcting an invalid sentence by adding a statutorily mandated term is a substantive correction that a trial court may make on its own initiative only before judgment is entered. In this case, the trial court did not have authority to amend the judgment of sentence after entry to add a provision for consecutive sentencing under MCL 768.7a(2). 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.

Clement, J., did not participate.


Summaries of

People v. Warrick

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Nov 29, 2017
501 Mich. 920 (Mich. 2017)
Case details for

People v. Warrick

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mary Ellen…

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan.

Date published: Nov 29, 2017

Citations

501 Mich. 920 (Mich. 2017)
501 Mich. 920

Citing Cases

People v. Tietz

Subsequent to the issuance of its decision in Comer, the Supreme Court has indicated, in multiple orders,…

People v. Gilbert

And, in this case, the trial court did not have authority to amend the judgment of sentence after entry to…