People of Michigan v. Timothy R Susorney ( 2015 )


Menu:
  • Order                                                                                        Michigan Supreme Court
    Lansing, Michigan
    October 28, 2015                                                                                     Robert P. Young, Jr.,
    Chief Justice
    148447                                                                                               Stephen J. Markman
    Brian K. Zahra
    Bridget M. McCormack
    David F. Viviano
    Richard H. Bernstein
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,                                                                          Joan L. Larsen,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,                                                                                       Justices
    v                                                                 SC: 148447
    COA: 317685
    Marquette CC: 12-050570-FH
    12-050865-FH
    TIMOTHY R. SUSORNEY,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    _________________________________________/
    By order of July 29, 2014, the application for leave to appeal the November 15,
    2013 order of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in People
    v Lockridge (Docket No. 149073). On order of the Court, the case having been decided
    on July 29, 2015, 
    498 Mich. 358
    (2015), the application is again considered. Pursuant to
    MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the
    Marquette Circuit Court to determine whether the court would have imposed a materially
    different sentence for the defendant’s third-degree criminal sexual conduct conviction
    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 for that conviction 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 for
    that conviction 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.
    I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
    foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
    October 28, 2015
    s1019
    Clerk
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 148447

Filed Date: 10/28/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2015