Legal Opinion
People v. Armisted
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided December 6, 2011No. Docket No. 302902PublishedCited by 65 opinions
1Per curiam
Defendant appeals by delayed leave granted following his conditional no-contest plea to the offense of furnishing a cellular phone to a prisoner, MCL 800.283a, for which he was sentenced as a fourth habitual offender, MCL 769.12, to a prison term of 1 to 10 years. Defendant’s no-contest plea was conditioned on the outcome of this appeal. We affirm.
I
On October 26, 2009, a corrections officer working at the Tuscola Residential Reentry Program (TRRP) searched an inmate room and found a cellular phone in the trash can. Matthew Huggard, who was defendant’s roommate at TRRP] told an officer at the…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- People v. CarinesMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
- People v. GintherMichigan Supreme Court · 1973
- People v. MilbournMichigan Supreme Court · 1990
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- People v. NorfleetMichigan Court of Appeals · 2016
- People of Michigan v. Richard Allen BahamMichigan Court of Appeals · 2017
- People v. WhiteMichigan Court of Appeals · 2014
- People v. NorwoodMichigan Court of Appeals · 2013
- Hayes v. Parole BoardMichigan Court of Appeals · 2015
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.