One Stop Shop For Everything Lockridge
FAQs for Practitioners, Informational Guide for Prisoners, Training Videos, and Sample Pleadings
In People v Lockridge, 498 Mich 358 (2015), the Michigan Supreme Court concluded that the Michigan sentencing guidelines create a mandatory minimum sentence range that violates the rule of Apprendi v New Jersey, 530 US 466 (2000), and Alleyne v United States, 133 S Ct 2151 (2013), and thus violates the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, because the sentencing scheme uses judicial fact-finding in the scoring of the offense variables. SADO has put together important resources for practitioners and defendants to help advocate in the post-Lockridge era.
More information:
- NEW: Lockridge and Advisory Sentencing Guidelines, Anne Yantus and Brett DeGroff
- FAQs for Practitioners Following Lockridge, Anne Yantus
- Guide for Defendants Following Lockridge, Jacqueline McCann
- Training Videos: Lockridge: What You Need to Know and Negotiating Plea Agreements in the Era of Advisory Sentencing Guidelines.
- United States Sentencing Commission Departure and Variance Primer referenced in 8-20-15 Webinar.
Sample Lockridge Pleadings:
Current Articles
- Work Smarter: AI for Life after Release
- SADO attorney to participate in Michigan Supreme Court's Community Connections Program
- 2025 Project Reentry Workshops
- What sentencing judges think
- New report reviews progress made in the decade since Montgomery v Louisiana
- Safe & Just Michigan
- Ask an appellate attorney: What question do I need to ask in my statement of questions presented?
- Digital Literacy with The Friends U Need Workshop -- Tonight!
- MAACS is hiring a Voucher Review Attorney
- Ask an appellate attorney: Does the prosecutor have to disclose that a witness changed their story before the trial if they have the witness acknowledge the inconsistency at trial?
Subscriber Comments