People v. Young

Jansen, PJ.

These consolidated cases are before us on remand from the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reversed our prior holding concerning the interpretation of the “remaining portion” clause of MCL 768.7a(2); MSA 28.1030(1)(2). People v Young, 206 Mich App 144; 521 NW2d 340 (1994). The Supreme Court held that the “remaining portion” clause of § 7a(2) requires that the parole violator serve at least the combined mínimums of the sentences, plus whatever portion of the earlier sentence the Parole Board may, because the parolee violated the terms of the parole, require the parolee to serve.…