People v. Preuss
Michigan Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLevin, J.
I concur in the Court’s decision to adhere to the holding in People v Stoudemire, 429 Mich 262, 278; 414 NW2d 693 (1987), that “multiple convictions arising out of a single incident may count as only a single prior conviction for purposes of the [habitual offender] statute.” I dissent from the Court’s decision not to apply in the instant case the rationale stated in Stoudemire.
i
Preuss’ first two felony convictions could not have triggered the sentence enhancement provi*740sion of MCL 769.10; MSA 28.1082.1 When Preuss was first sentenced, he could not have been sentenced as a second felony…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. StoudemireMichigan Supreme Court · 1987
- People v. ReedMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988