Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS


PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v BERNARD CARPENTER, Defendant-Appellant.

UNPUBLISHED October 1, 1996

No. 184910 LC No. 94-050625-FH

Before: J.H. Gillis, P.J., and G.S. Allen and J.B. Sullivan, JJ.* MEMORANDUM. Defendant pleaded nolo contendere to entering a building without breaking but with intent to commit larceny, MCL 750.111; MSA 28.306, and was sentenced to twenty-three to sixty months' imprisonment, to be served consecutively to a sentence for which he was on parole at the time of committing the instant offense. He appeals as of right. We affirm. This case has been decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(A). Defendant's sole claim is that the trial court erred by ordering a consecutive sentence, as opposed to a concurrent sentence. We disagree. Consecutive sentencing was mandatory. MCL 768.7a(2); MSA 28.1030(1)(2); People v Watts, 186 Mich App 686, 687-688; 464 NW2d 715 (1991). Defendant's reliance on People v Young, 206 Mich App 144 (1994), rev'd sub nom Wayne Co Prosecutor v Dep't of Corrections, 451 Mich 569; 548 NW2d 900 (1996), is misplaced because the issue in Young was whether the Department of Corrections was correctly computing the cumulative length of consecutive sentences. In any event, our Supreme Court reversed this Court's decision in Young without altering a sentencing court's statutory obligation to impose a consecutive sentence under MCL 769.7a(2); MSA 28.1030(1)(2).

*Former Court of Appeals judges, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment pursuant to Administrative Order 1996-3. -1

Affirmed. /s/ John H. Gillis /s/ Glenn S. Allen, Jr. /s/ Joseph B. Sullivan

-2



Download PEOPLE OF MI V BERNARD CARPENTER.pdf

Michigan Law