
    People v Hicks,
    No. 151547; Court of Appeals No. 324343.
   On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 19, 2015 order of the Court of Appeals is considered. With regard to the defendant’s challenge to costs, leave to appeal is denied, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court prior to the completion of the proceedings ordered by the Court of Appeals. Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we order that, in addition to the proceedings ordered by the Court of Appeals, the Wayne Circuit Court shall also determine whether the court would have imposed a materially different sentence under the sentencing procedure described in People v Lockridge, 498 Mich 358 (2015). On remand, the trial court shall follow the procedure described in Part VI of our opinion. If the trial court determines that it would have imposed the same sentence absent the unconstitutional constraint on its discretion, it may reaffirm the original sentence. If, however, the trial court determines that it would not have imposed the same sentence absent the unconstitutional constraint on its discretion, it shall resen-tence the defendant. In all other respects, leave to appeal is denied, because we are not persuaded that the remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court. We do not retain jurisdiction.  