The Michigan Supreme Court has cracked open the door to a new review of a high-profile Southfield shooting case, sending it back to the state Court of Appeals and putting a 50-year prison term under fresh scrutiny. At issue is how Michigan's sentencing guidelines and habitual-offender enhancements were used to arrive at that lengthy punishment.
The defendant, 30-year-old Tre Elexender Law, pleaded guilty to charges that included discharge of a firearm at or into a building, along with related counts. In 2024, Oakland County Circuit Judge Michael W. Warren sentenced him as a habitual offender to 50 years in prison, with a concurrent 25-year term for being a felon in possession of a firearm and a separate two-year sentence for a felony-firearm conviction. Law is currently housed at the St. Louis Correctional Facility, with his earliest possible discharge date listed as May 20, 2034, according to The Oakland Press.
Law first took his case to the Michigan Court of Appeals, which in 2025 rejected his appeal and concluded that his arguments lacked merit. He continued to challenge how his sentencing guidelines were scored. However, yesterday, the Michigan Supreme Court sent the Southfield shooting case back to the Court of Appeals, according to The Oakland Press. The high court's order does not change Law's sentence on its own, but it does require the appellate judges to revisit the legal issues he raised.
What the remand could mean
The Court of Appeals is now expected to take another look at whether the trial court correctly applied Michigan's sentencing guidelines and the habitual-offender enhancement in Law's case. If the judges find a scoring error or a problem with the procedure, they could order Law to be resentenced. If they conclude there was no error, his current sentence will likely remain in place.
Case background
Prosecutors say the underlying incident happened in 2023 in Southfield and led to felony-firearm and related charges. At sentencing, prosecutors also relied on Law's prior convictions, including stealing a vehicle, receiving or concealing stolen property, carrying a concealed weapon, and delivery of a controlled substance, to argue for enhanced penalties.
Next steps
The Court of Appeals will now receive the case again for additional written briefing and possibly oral argument. The court has not yet set a timetable. Either side could ask for the case to move more quickly, but appellate schedules vary, and the renewed review could still take months.
Legal note
Fights over sentencing guideline scoring are technical on the surface, yet can carry major consequences for how long someone stays behind bars, especially when habitual offender enhancements are involved. The remand keeps Law's challenge alive and gives the Court of Appeals a chance to fix any error it finds, although it does not guarantee that his sentence will be reduced.
