Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

PEOPLE v LANKEY (AFTER REMAND)

AFTER REMAND

PER CURIAM.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of five counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, MCL 750.520b(1)(a); MSA 28.788(2) (1)(a), involving his then six-year-old granddaughter. Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of two to ten years in prison. The minimum sentence recommended by the sentencing guidelines is between eight and ten years.

In our previous opinion, People v Lankey, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, decided September 22, 1992 (Docket Nos. 126668, 154456), we affirmed defendant's convictions but remanded the case to the trial court for reconsideration of the sentences in light of People v Milbourn, 435 Mich. 630; 461 N.W.2d 1 (1990). On remand, the trial court ruled that Milbourn did not apply to sentences that are less than recommended by the guidelines. This ruling is erroneous and contrary to our remand instructions.

The prosecutor contends that defendant's sentences are disproportionately lenient given the gravity of the offense. We agree and accordingly vacate defendant's sentences and remand for resentencing. The resentencing shall occur before a different judge. People v Evans, 156 Mich. App. 68, 72-73; 401 N.W.2d 312 (1986). Also see People v Fisher (After Second Remand), 190 Mich. App. 598, 608-609; 476 N.W.2d 762 (1991), lv gtd 439 Mich. 1002 (1992). We do not retain jurisdiction.

Convictions affirmed, sentences vacated, and case remanded for resentencing.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. LANKEY (AFTER REM)
(Feb 2, 1993)