Assessment of court costs pursuant to MCL 769.1k(1)(b)(iii); Constitutionality of MCL 769.1k(1)(b)(iii) on due-process & separation-of-powers grounds; People v Lewis (Unpub); People v Johnson

On remand from the Michigan Supreme Court, the court found that defendant’s arguments were essentially identical to those made by the defendant in Lewis. Thus, it adopted the analysis in Lewis as its own for purposes of this case. Defendant failed to show MCL 769.1k(1)(b)(iii) is unconstitutional on due-process or separation-of-powers grounds. The appeal arose from her “convictions of stealing, removing, retaining, or secreting another’s financial transaction device without consent,” for which she was sentenced to nine months in jail and two years’ probation. Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s instructions, the court’s “task was to address the trial court’s assessment of court costs against defendant under MCL 769.1k(1)(b)(iii)” in light of the court’s decision in Lewis. Like the defendant in Lewis, defendant here “raised a challenge to the constitutionality of MCL 769.1k(1)(b)(iii) on due-process and separation-of-powers grounds in her application for leave to appeal filed in the Supreme Court. Defendant did not make any specific allegations of impartiality with respect to the trial judge in her case but instead directed her arguments at the statute’s effect on all Michigan judges.” Thus, she asserted a facial challenge, as did the defendant in Lewis. Affirmed.