FAQs for Practitioners after the Michigan Supreme Court Ruling in People v Lockridge
In People v Lockridge, ___ Mich ___ (Docket No. 149073, 7/29/15), 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.
Learn how this decision affects felony sentencing in Michigan moving forward by reading Anne Yantus' Answers to Lockridge FAQs.
Current Articles
- Project Reentry's End of Summer Gathering
- SADO is hiring Assistant Defenders
- SADO's Michael Mittlestat works with UM clinical law students to secure new trial
- Crime class mysteries: Mismatched sentencing guidelines crime classifications
- More than a file: The power of the attorney-client relationship
- Safe & Just Michigan
- Project Reentry's June Workshop Tonight!
- Safe & Just Michigan
- Ask an appellate attorney: Would Alex Murdaugh have been granted a new trial if he had been an indigent defendant in Michigan?
- SADO is hiring a Records Specialist
Subscriber Comments