People of the State of Michigan v. Richard Frank Jackson

Summary

The Michigan Court of Appeals vacated Richard Frank Jackson’s sentence for third-degree criminal sexual conduct and remanded for further articulation of the reasons supporting the sentencing departure or for resentencing. The court held that the trial court generally provided adequate justification for departing from the advisory guidelines range but expressed concern that it may have improperly penalized Jackson for delaying acceptance of a plea and had not sufficiently explained the extent of the departure. The court retained jurisdiction and limited remand proceedings to those issues.

Holdings

1. The trial court adequately explained and justified departing from the advisory sentencing-guidelines range because it considered the seriousness of the offense, factors not adequately considered by the guidelines, and the nature of the plea bargain and dismissed charges.
2. A trial court may not use a defendant’s delay in accepting a plea agreement as a reason for an upward departure because doing so may penalize the defendant for exercising the right to trial.
3. The trial court was required to further explain why the particular 10-year minimum sentence was more proportionate than a different sentence, especially because it represented a substantial departure from the guidelines and the maximum minimum sentence permissible under the two-thirds rule.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court adequately justified its upward departure from the sentencing-guidelines range.
2. Whether the trial court improperly considered defendant’s delay in accepting a plea agreement in imposing the departure sentence.
3. Whether the trial court adequately explained why the extent of the departure was more proportionate to the offense and offender than a lesser sentence.

Disposition

vacated