Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Grant

Court of Appeals of Michigan

September 19, 2019

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Adam Douglas GRANT, Defendant-Appellant.

         Submitted August 6, 2019, at Grand Rapids.

Page 173

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 174

         Eaton Circuit Court LC No. 93-000075-FC

          Douglas R. Lloyd, Prosecuting Attorney, and Brent E. Morton, Senior Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

         Adam D. Grant in propria persona.

         Before: Gadola, P.J., and Markey and Ronayne Krause, JJ.

         Markey, J.

         Defendant appeals as on leave granted the circuit court's order denying his motion for written approval to make him eligible for early parole under MCL 769.12(4). The court had also previously rejected a request from the Parole Board to grant defendant early parole. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

         To give context to our discussion of the factual and procedural history of the case, we begin with a brief overview of the law implicated in this matter. MCL 769.12 addresses fourth-offense habitual offenders such as defendant, and this appeal concerns the construction of Subsection (4) of the statute, which provides:

         Because defendant committed the crimes before December 15, 1998, he is not a "prisoner subject to disciplinary time." MCL 791.233c ("As used in this act, `prisoner subject to disciplinary time' means that term as defined in ... [MCL] 800.34[.]"); MCL 800.34(5)(a) (A "prisoner subject to disciplinary time" encompasses prisoners sentenced to indeterminate terms of imprisonment for enumerated "crimes committed on or after December 15, 1998[.]"); Hayes v. Parole Bd., 312 Mich.App. 774, 779 n. 1, 886 N.W.2d 725 (2015). Accordingly, Subsection (4)(a) of MCL 769.12 governs, as opposed to Subsection (4)(b).[1]

Page 175

          We now turn to the facts of the case. In 1993, defendant was convicted by a jury of bank robbery, MCL 750.531; conspiracy to commit bank robbery, MCL 750.157a and MCL 750.531; and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (felony-firearm), MCL 750.227b. He was sentenced as a fourth-offense habitual offender, MCL 769.12, to concurrent prison terms of 27 to 50 years for the bank robbery and conspiracy convictions, preceded by a consecutive two-year sentence for the felony-firearm conviction. And those three sentences were to be served consecutively to a sentence that defendant was already serving. Defendant's convictions and sentences were affirmed by this Court on appeal. People v. Grant, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Court of Appeals, issued February 14, 1997 (Docket No. 167327), 1997 WL 33354337. Our Supreme Court then denied defendant's application for leave to appeal. People v. Grant, 456 Mich. 954, 577 N.W.2d 687 (1998).

         The "calendar minimum date" for defendant's release from prison is June 30, 2022; however, his "net minimum date" for release— defendant's calendar minimum date less disciplinary credits— was December 31, 2017.[2] Accordingly, in December 2017, subject to the "written approval" prerequisite, defendant became eligible for parole under MCL 791.233(1)(b) and MCL 791.233b(m) and (x).[3] And the Parole ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.