From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Konopka

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Sep 19, 2014
852 N.W.2d 903 (Mich. 2014)

Opinion

Docket No. 149047. COA No. 319913.

2014-09-19

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Lindsey Lynn KONOPKA, Defendant–Appellant.


Order

On order of the Court, the motion to add issue and file supplemental brief is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the February 21, 2014 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of whether the circuit court improperly imposed court costs, in light of our decision in People v. Cunningham, 496 Mich. 145, 852 N.W.2d 118 (2014), and if so, whether the circuit court's assessment of $500 in “court costs” constitutes plain error affecting the defendant's substantial rights. Contrast People v. Franklin, 491 Mich. 916, 813 N.W.2d 285 (2012), with Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 467–468, 117 S.Ct. 1544, 137 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997).

We direct the Court of Appeals' attention to the fact that we have also remanded People v. Holbrook (Docket No. 149005) to the Court of Appeals for consideration of similar issues. In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.


Summaries of

People v. Konopka

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Sep 19, 2014
852 N.W.2d 903 (Mich. 2014)
Case details for

People v. Konopka

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Lindsey Lynn…

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan.

Date published: Sep 19, 2014

Citations

852 N.W.2d 903 (Mich. 2014)

Citing Cases

People v. Konopka

Court of Appeals for consideration of similar issues.[ [] In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED,…

People v. Johnson

After 2014 PA 352 was implemented, the validity of § 1k(1)(b)(iii ) was again presented to the courts after…