September, 2015

BB 254545:  Defendant’s 25-year mandatory minimum sentence is disproportionate and constitutes cruel and/or unusual punishment.  Us Const, Amend VIII; Const 1963, Art 1, § 16.

BB 256605:  The court should remand for a Ginther hearing where Defendant made a timely pre-sentence motion to withdraw the plea and alleged specific instances of ineffective assistance of counsel leading to an involuntary plea.

BB 256853:  The sentence imposed on defendant for assault with intent to murder is both procedurally and substantively unreasonable.

BB 257127:  The fine imposed on defendant at sentencing is invalid because such punishment was imposed outside the plea agreement; defendant asks the court to correct the sentence by vacating the illegal portion, i.e., the fine.

BB 257391:  The police violated appellant’s due process rights by coercing a witness into incriminating appellant; alternatively, defense trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective in failing to move to suppress the testimony of the witness.

BB 257473:  Defendant’s convictions and sentences should be vacated, and the charges ordered dismissed with prejudice, as Defendant was denied his constitutional right to speedy trial.

BB 257619:  Judicial fact-finding in the scoring of the Michigan Sentencing Guidelines violates the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

BB 257713:  Defendant was improperly sentenced as a fourth habitual offender, and defense counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel, where two of Defendant’s prior “felony” convictions were misdemeanor marijuana offenses.

BB 257758:  Due process requires reinstating the prosecutor’s pretrial plea offer of a recommended ten-and-a-half year minimum prison sentence for armed robbery with dismissal of the remaining charges and habitual offender enhancement, where defense trial counsel failed to inform appellant of the risk that a conviction for assault with intent to do great bodily harm was punishable as a fourth habitual offender with a minimum sentence of twenty-five years in prison.

BB 257758:  The trial court violated appellant’s due process rights by refusing to allow defense counsel to cross-examine the complainant about a prior conviction for carrying a concealed weapon where defense counsel had asked the complainant “isn’t it true that … it was your gun that was involved in this” and the complainant testified “I never had a gun”; alternatively, defense trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective in expressing satisfaction with the trial court’s ruling.

BB 257991:  Reversible error occurred when the trial court displayed its bias while questioning the prosecution’s expert witness on child abuse.

BB 258193:  Defendant is entitled to a Crosby remand for resentencing under Lockridge, as the court engaged in judicial fact-finding that increased his sentencing range in violation of his Sixth Amendment rights.

BB 258251:  The trial court imposed an unreasonable sentence of 17 to 25 years imprisonment for the crime of stealing less than $200 while “armed” for this middle-age habitual offender who had his hand in his pocket with no actual weapon.

BB 258326:  The prosecutor has breached the terms of the plea bargain by filing this appeal; moreover, there is no justiceable controversy as the prosecutor is not an aggrieved party.