People v. March, 499 Mich. 389

Defendant held a power of attorney and remained in possession of his father’s mortgaged Westland home during the six‑month statutory redemption period after a sheriff’s sale.
Purchaser (Hamood/Vonelle Ventures) bought the property at the sheriff’s sale; the statutory six‑month redemption period ran from the sale date.
The day after the redemption period expired, purchaser found built‑in fixtures (cabinets, furnace, doors, hot water tank, etc.) missing and reported it; police later found many items at defendant’s residence.
Defendant was charged with larceny in a dwelling (MCL 750.360) and receiving/possessing stolen goods (MCL 750.535(4)(a)).
Trial court dismissed after prosecutor conceded defendant had the right to possess during redemption; Court of Appeals reversed, reasoning purchaser’s equitable interest and statutory remedy created an owner‑type interest requiring consent.
Michigan Supreme Court granted review and reversed the Court of Appeals, reinstating dismissal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether removing fixtures after a sheriff’s sale but before redemption can be larceny	Purchaser’s equitable interest plus MCL 600.3278(1) gives purchaser an owner‑type right (consent required), so fixtures were "property of another"	Defendant had exclusive possessory rights during redemption; no one else had right to possess as against him, so no trespassory taking	Held: No larceny — "property of another" requires another to have a right to possess as against defendant at time of taking; purchaser had no possessory right during redemption
Whether fixtures can be the subject of larceny	(Prosecution) Fixtures severed from realty become personalty and may be stolen	(Defense) Possession at time controls; if defendant possessed them lawfully, cannot be larceny	Court did not need to decide generically here; noted severed fixtures become personal property but focused on possessory right and found none of larceny because defendant had rightful possession

People v Randolph, 466 Mich 532 (2002) (articulates common‑law elements of larceny as trespassory taking from another’s possession)
People v Christenson, 412 Mich 81 (1981) (larceny is a crime against possession, not title)
Kubczak v Chemical Bank & Trust Co, 456 Mich 653 (1998) (foreclosure purchaser lacks legal possession during redemption period; mortgagor retains possession absent agreement)
People v Sheldon, 208 Mich App 331 (1995) (larceny can be charged where property is taken from one who has rightful possession; analyzed consent/possession issues)
People v Long, 50 Mich 249 (1883) (title owner who secretly removed chattel from party who had rightful possession was guilty of larceny)