On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 31, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE that part of the Court of Appeals judgment holding that the exclusion of the victim's blood alcohol content was not harmless error, and we REMAND this case to that court for reconsideration of the issue. While the Court of Appeals identified potential consequences for defendant's trial strategy as a result of the exclusion of the disputed evidence, it erroneously equated such consequences with an assessment of whether it is "more probable than not that a different outcome *449would have resulted" had the evidence been admitted. People v. Lukity , 460 Mich. 484, 495, 596 N.W.2d 607 (1999). See MCL 769.26. While defendant's defense strategy is one pertinent consideration, on remand the Court of Appeals must consider it alongside the weight and strength of the untainted evidence and the proofs as a whole. People v. Lyles , 501 Mich. 107, 118, 905 N.W.2d 199 (2017).
We do not retain jurisdiction.