One Court of Justice

On November 20, 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court ordered oral arguments on the applications for leave to appeal in three cases, peremptorily reversed the Court of Appeals in a sentencing case, remanded another sentencing case for further consideration in light of People v. Jackson, 483 Mich. 271 (2009), and took other action in 9 cases.

In People v. Abdullah, the Court granted a MOA to determine whether to review the Court of Appeals’ decision reversing the defendant’s conviction for third-degree criminal sexual conduct (“CSC III”) because that offense is not a lesser included offense to first-degree criminal sexual conduct (“CSC I”).  Specifically, on the facts presented, the Court of Appeals concluded that CSC III required the defendant to have accomplished sexual penetration by force or coercion which was not required for a conviction under the charged offense of CSC I.

The Court ordered oral argument on the application in People v. Jackson, to address whether the defendant is entitled to resentencing where the Court of Appeals vacated two of the defendant’s three convictions, but his minimum sentence remains with the the corrected guidelines sentence range.

The Court ordered oral argument on the application in Raab v. River Ridge-Saline, LLC, to determine whether the Washtenaw Circuit Court violated AO 1998-1 by remanding the case to the district court.  AO 1998-1 only permits a circuit to remand a case to the district court if the parties stipulate or if the circuit court concludes “[f]rom the allegations of the complaint, it appears to a legal certainty that the amount in controversy is not greater than” $25,000.  On a motion under MCR 2.116(C)(10), the circuit court concluded the amount in controversy was less than $25,000 and remanded the case to the district court.  The Court of Appeals affirmed, with Judge Shapiro dissenting on this issue.  The Michigan Supreme Court ordered the parties to brief whether the circuit court erred “by remanding the case based on its review of documents the plaintiffs submitted with their response to the defendant’s motion for summary disposition.”

In People v. Pontius, the Court peremptorily reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case to the Kalamazoo County Circuit Court for amendment of the judgment of sentence.  In Pontius, the term of years imposed by the trial court for the defendant’s conviction of conspiracy to commit murder was determined to be invalid.  The original sentence was concurrent with the defendant’s sentence on another charge in Calhoun County.  When the trial court modified the sentence, it not only changed the term but it also changed the sentence so that the term ran consecutive to the defendant’s Calhoun County conviction.  The Michigan Supreme Court determined that the trial court did not have authority to modify the valid portion of the sentence.

The Court partially granted a motion for reconsideration in Wolverine Commerce, L.L.C. v. Pittsfield Charter Township, and remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of the defendant township’s challenge to the trial court’s award of expert witness fees to the plaintiff.

In People v. Woolsey, the Court vacated the Macomb County Circuit Court’s assessment of court-appointed attorney fees and remanded the case for reconsideration in accordance with People v. Jackson, 483 Mich. 271 (2009).  Our post on the Jackson decision is here.

The Court held the application for leave to appeal in People v. Barkley in abeyance pending the Court’s determination of People v. Feezel.

The Court also denied leave to appeal in 8 cases.