Court Opinion

ID: 9658134
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 20:47:44.84747+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:51.787185
License: Public Domain

Shepherd, J.
(dissenting). I dissent because I believe that this opinion is premature. The effect of People v Milbourn, 435 Mich 630; 461 NW2d 1 (1990), on a consecutive sentence was not argued in the Court of Appeals or in the trial court, nor could it have been, because Milbourn was released almost simultaneously with the submission of this case to this Court. The issue is of sufficient importance that counsel for both sides and the trial court should have the opportunity to address it in a full hearing after briefs have been filed. I would remand for a hearing before the trial court so that this important issue can be addressed.