|
No. 137486
| The People of the State of Michigan, |
|
Dale A. DeGarmo |
Plaintiff-Appellee, |
|
|
| v |
(Appeal from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
(Genesee - Hayman, A.) |
|
|
| Gregory Lewis Holder, |
|
Jacqueline J. McCann |
Defendant-Appellant. |
|
|
| __________________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiff-Appellee's Brief in Opposition to Application for Leave to Appeal>>
Defendant-Appellant's Application for Leave to Appeal>>
Defendant-Appellant's Supplemental Brief>>
Department of Corrections' Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Background
Gregory Lewis Holder had been on parole, but was discharged before the charges in this case were brought against him. Under a plea agreement involving other cases, Holder pleaded guilty to possession with intent to deliver over 1,000 grams of cocaine, felon in possession of a firearm, and felony-firearm. Holder was sentenced to concurrent terms of 225 to 475 months for the cocaine charge, and 12 to 60 months for being a felon in possession of a firearm; both sentences were consecutive to a term of 24 months for felony-firearm. Holder filed an application for leave to appeal in the Court of Appeals, which denied leave to appeal. Later, the Michigan Department of Corrections wrote a letter to the trial court, informing the court that, because Holder had committed an offense in another case while still on parole, the MDOC reinstated Holder’s on-parole status. The trial court should consider Holder to have been “on parole” when the offenses in this case were committed, MDOC stated. Holder’s being on parole would justify the imposition of consecutive sentences, rather than concurrent sentences, MDOC’s letter stated. The trial court accordingly amended the judgments of sentence to make Holder’s sentences in this case consecutive to the sentences for which Holder had been on parole. The trial court did not notify Holder of its actions or hold a hearing. When Holder learned that the trial court had modified the judgments of sentence and that MDOC had recalculated his release dates, he filed an application for leave to appeal, asking the Court of Appeals to review the trial court’s actions. The Court of Appeals denied leave to appeal. Holder appeals.
Top of Page
|
