Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Michigan » Supreme Court » 2008 » PEOPLE OF MI V DAVID GORDON REAM
PEOPLE OF MI V DAVID GORDON REAM
State: Michigan
Court: Supreme Court
Docket No: 134913
Case Date: 06/11/2008
Preview:Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Opinion
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v DAVID GORDON REAM, Defendant-Appellee. _______________________________ PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v DAVID GORDON REAM, Defendant-Appellant. _______________________________ BEFORE THE ENTIRE BENCH MARKMAN, J.

Chief Justice:

Justices:

Clifford W. Taylor

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman

FILED JUNE 11, 2008

No. 134913

No. 134925

At issue here is whether convicting and sentencing a defendant for both first-degree felony murder and the predicate felony violates the "multiple punishments" strand of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States and

Michigan constitutions.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted and

sentenced for first-degree felony murder and first-degree criminal sexual conduct, where the latter constituted the predicate felony for the former. The Court of Appeals affirmed defendant's first-degree felony-murder conviction and sentence, but vacated defendant's first-degree criminal sexual conduct conviction and sentence on double-jeopardy grounds. We conclude that convicting and

sentencing a defendant for both felony murder and the predicate felony does not necessarily violate the "multiple punishments" strand of the Double Jeopardy Clause, and, thus, we overrule People v Wilder, 411 Mich 328, 342; 308 NW2d 112 (1981). Because each of the offenses for which defendant was convicted has an element that the other does not, they are not the "same offense" and, therefore, defendant may be punished for both. Accordingly, we reverse the part of the Court of Appeals judgment that vacated defendant's first-degree criminal sexual conduct conviction and sentence, and we reinstate them. In addition, defendant's application for leave to appeal the judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is denied, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Defendant forced his 92-year-old neighbor into her bedroom, stripped her of her clothing, and killed her by stabbing her in the abdomen and genital area 23 times with a kitchen knife. Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted and sentenced for first-degree felony murder and first-degree criminal sexual conduct, 2


where the latter was the predicate felony for the felony-murder conviction. The Court of Appeals affirmed defendant's felony-murder conviction and sentence, but vacated the criminal sexual conduct conviction and sentence on double-jeopardy grounds. Unpublished opinion per curiam, issued July 31, 2007 (Docket No. 268266). Both the prosecutor and defendant filed applications for leave to appeal in this Court. We heard oral argument on whether to grant the prosecutor's application or take other peremptory action permitted by MCR 7.302(G)(1). 480 Mich 935 (2007). II. STANDARD OF REVIEW A double-jeopardy challenge presents a question of constitutional law that this Court reviews de novo. People v Nutt, 469 Mich 565, 573; 677 NW2d 1 (2004). III. ANALYSIS Const 1963, art 1,
Download PEOPLE OF MI V DAVID GORDON REAM.pdf

Michigan Law

Michigan State Laws
Michigan Court
Michigan Tax
Michigan Labor Laws
Michigan State
    > Michigan Counties
    > Michigan Zip Codes
Michigan Agencies

Comments

Tips