People of Michigan v. Andre Luckie, 328641

In early July 2009 a house occupied by Andre Luckie and his then-wife Jessica caught fire; investigators determined three separate intentionally set fires and detected gasoline at multiple locations.
Jessica had moved out after a July 3 fight; she testified Luckie’s clothes left behind were piled on a spare bed and burned; Luckie and her family testified to her whereabouts around the fire.
Defendant was at the house when the fire occurred; his demeanor at the scene and a late-night text message were part of the prosecution’s evidence.
Defendant left Michigan months later (to Alabama, then Texas/Colorado) and was arrested in 2014; the jury convicted him of arson of a dwelling house and acquitted him of arson of an insured property.
At sentencing the trial court scored OVs 2, 4, 9, and 19 via judicial fact-finding, producing a guidelines range of 45–150 months; defendant was sentenced as a fourth habitual offender to 60 months–30 years.
On appeal the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, but ordered a Crosby remand under Lockridge because judicial OV fact-finding raised the mandatory minimum range.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a jury instruction on flight was proper	Evidence supported a flight instruction; jury should consider leaving jurisdiction after the crime as probative	Luckie argued no flight occurred or that leaving state without charge cannot support a flight instruction	Court held flight instruction was permissible; remoteness of departure affects weight not admissibility and consciousness of guilt is for the jury (Michigan law)
Whether judicial fact-finding to score OVs violated the Sixth Amendment	Trial court scored OVs based on evidence and its findings, producing the guidelines range used at sentencing	Luckie argued OVs 2, 4, 9, 19 required jury findings or admissions and thus judicial scoring violated Lockridge/Alleyne	Court held Lockridge applies; OVs were scored by judge beyond jury findings, affecting the floor — ordered a Crosby remand to resolve possible material difference in sentence
Whether conviction should be reversed	Prosecution maintained sufficient evidence supported conviction for arson of a dwelling	Luckie argued various defenses and factual disputes about who set the fire	Court affirmed the conviction (no reversible error in trial rulings)

People v. Gillis, 474 Mich. 105 (discretionary review of jury instruction applicability)
People v. Mills, 450 Mich. 61 (requested jury instruction must be supported by evidence)
People v. Unger, 278 Mich. App. 210 (flight evidence: jury determines consciousness of guilt)
People v. Compeau, 244 Mich. App. 595 (remoteness of flight affects weight, not admissibility)
People v. Coleman, 210 Mich. App. 1 (definition of flight in Michigan)
People v. Smelley, 485 Mich. 1023 (prosecution need not prove motivation for leave-of-jurisdiction to admit flight evidence)
People v. Jackson, 497 Mich. 857 (OV2—incendiary device possession/use as a weapon analysis)
People v. Lockridge, 498 Mich. 358 (guidelines unconstitutional to extent they permit judge-found facts to mandatorily increase floor)
Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (any fact increasing mandatory penalty is an element requiring jury finding)