Memith Case Study

The People of the State of Michigan v. Ricky F. Smith is a court case where Mr. Smith’s juvenile record came into consideration during sentencing as an adult. Ricky F. Smith had an extensive criminal background as a minor. According to 437 Mich. 293, 470 N.W. 2d 70, defendant Ricky Smith had twelve criminal entries on his juvenile record. The twelve entries included seven prior felonies, three misdemeanors and two memorandums of charges. As an adult, Ricky Smith was arrested for breaking and entering with the intent to commit larceny as an adult. During the sentencing of the breaking and entering, as an adult, the judge took into account the alleged expunged juvenile record of the defendant. The Judge said that the sentence was imposed because Smith's record included seven prior felonies and three misdemeanors, and he viewed the sentence as appropriate to punish Smith, to protect society, and to deter others from committing like offenses. As a result Smith was sentenced under a habitual offender statute that required a mandatory six to thirty years in prison (leagle.com, n.d.). Ricky Smith immediately appealed his sentence claiming that he would have only served a sentence of three and a half to ten years on the breaking and entering charge; however the presiding judge vacated that sentence and moved further with the habitual offender charge which carried a heavier sentence.

Mr. Smith’s counsel appealed the lower court’s decision to the Michigan Court of Appeals on grounds that he was entitled to be resentenced because his earlier sentence was based on a “presentence investigation report” that contained a reference to his juvenile criminal record. According to Smith, this juvenile record should have been automatically ex...

... middle of paper ...

...by counsel or waived representation. This construction would permit the probate court to maintain its own housekeeping system without imposing a "secondary source" rule on probation officers and trial Judges (leagle.com, n.d.). The court also recognized a modern view of sentencing and showed that a particular sentence is to balance of society’s need for protection and maximizing the rehabilitation of the offender. In order to do this, a judge must view the juvenile court history to reveal patterns of law breaking in an effort to reach an informed sentencing decision. The Court of Appeals, led by Justices Cavanaugh, C.J. and Binkly concurred with a decision to reverse and remand the case.

Resource:

leagle.com. (n.d.). People v. smith. Retrieved from http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page=1&xmldoc=1991730437Mich293_1713.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006&SizeDisp=7