Order Michigan Supreme Court
Lansing, Michigan
October 6, 2017 Stephen J. Markman,
Chief Justice
152570 Brian K. Zahra
Bridget M. McCormack
David F. Viviano
Richard H. Bernstein
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Joan L. Larsen
Plaintiff-Appellee, Kurtis T. Wilder,
Justices
v SC: 152570
COA: 328693
Monroe CC: 12-039730-FH;
12-039881-FH
ROMANO DESHAWN LUKE,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________/
By order of September 6, 2016, the application for leave to appeal the September
15, 2015 order of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in
People v Comer (Docket No. 152713). On order of the Court, the case having been
decided on June 23, 2017, 500 Mich ___ (2017), the application is again considered and,
pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the
March 5, 2015 amended judgments of sentence, and we REMAND this case to the
Monroe Circuit Court to reinstate the June 6, 2014 judgments of sentence. In Comer, we
held that correcting an invalid sentence by adding a statutorily mandated term is a
substantive correction that a trial court may make on its own initiative only before
judgment is entered. In this case, the trial court did not have authority to amend the
judgment of sentence after entry to add a provision for consecutive sentencing under
MCL 768.7a(2).
We do not retain jurisdiction.
ZAHRA, J., states as follows:
Consistently with my opinion in People v Comer, 500 Mich ____ (2017) (Docket
No. 152713) (ZAHRA J., concurring in part and dissenting in part), I disagree with the
majority’s chosen remedy to reinstate the very sentences it properly concluded were
invalid. Instead of reinstating an invalid sentence that is predicated on an invalid plea, I
would conclude that the appropriate remedy in this case is to “give the defendant the
opportunity to elect to allow the plea and sentence to stand or to withdraw the plea.”
MCR 6.310(C); cf. People v Cobbs, 443 Mich 276 (1993).
I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
October 6, 2017
s1003
Clerk