Opinion · Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Gatewood

216 Mich. App. 559

Type
Opinion
Court
Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction
Michigan
Date
1996-07-12
Topic
general

Per Curiam. On November 3, 1995, we issued our opinion in this matter. People v Gatewood, 214 Mich App 211; 542 NW2d 605 (1995). On March 19, 1996, the Supreme Court, in lieu of granting leave to appeal, issued an order remanding the case to this Court for reconsideration in light of its order. People v Gatewood, 450 Mich 1021 (1996).

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed People v. Gatewood. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
15 opinions
Per Curiam.

On November 3, 1995, we issued our opinion in this matter. People v Gatewood, 214 Mich App 211; 542 NW2d 605 (1995). On March 19, 1996, the Supreme Court, in lieu of granting leave to appeal, issued an order remanding the case to this Court for reconsideration in light of its order. People v Gatewood, 450 Mich 1021 (1996). Pursuant to that order, appellate review of habitual offender sentences using the sentencing guidelines in any fashion is inappropriate. Thus, our review of an habitual offender sentence is limited to considering whether the sentence violates the principle of proportionality set forth in People v Milbourn, 435 Mich 630; 461 NW2d 1 (1990), without reference to the guidelines. In light of the circumstances surrounding the offense and offender in this case, we conclude that defendant’s sentence does not violate the principle of proportionality, Milboum, supra, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing defendant, People v Cervantes, 448 Mich 620, 627, 630; 532 NW2d 831 (1995).

We affirm.