Skip to main content
A Better Partnership
May 12, 2010

MSC: People v. Wilcox

In a 4-3 decision with a slightly unusual alignment of Justices, the Michigan Supreme Court held yesterday that a 10-year minimum sentence imposed under MCR 750.520f, the repeat criminal sexual conduct offender statute, represents a departure from the legislative sentencing guidelines and thus had to be reversed based on the trial court's failure to state the "substantial and compelling reasons" for the sentence imposed. People v. Wilcox, No. 136956. Chief Justice Kelly authored the majority opinion, in which Justices Cavanagh, Markman, and Hathaway joined. Justice Young authored a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Corrigan. Justice Weaver also dissented, joining in large part Justice Young's dissent.

The key issue in the case is whether MCL ' 750.520f(1) mandates a five-year sentence, or any minimum sentence of five years or more. The Court of Appeals concluded that the mandate was five years or more. The statute states:

If a person is convicted of a second or subsequent offense under [MCL '' 750.520b, 750.520c, or 750.520d], the sentence imposed under those sections for the second or subsequent offense shall provide for a mandatory minimum sentence of at least 5 years.

MCL ' 750.520f(1). The majority agreed with the defendant that a five-year minimum is the only sentence that is mandatory, and that any sentence above five years is permissive, thus triggering the need for a sentencing court explanation for any "departure," i.e., a sentence in excess of five years. The dissent believed that conclusion to be "wholly inconsistent with the plain meaning" of the statute, which does not create an absolute "mandatory minimum" sentence of five years, but instead creates an indeterminate "mandatory minimum," under which five years is the starting point of the minimum sentence, not its upper terminus.

NOTICE. Although we would like to hear from you, we cannot represent you until we know that doing so will not create a conflict of interest. Also, we cannot treat unsolicited information as confidential. Accordingly, please do not send us any information about any matter that may involve you until you receive a written statement from us that we represent you.

By clicking the ‘ACCEPT’ button, you agree that we may review any information you transmit to us. You recognize that our review of your information, even if you submitted it in a good faith effort to retain us, and even if you consider it confidential, does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could and will be used against you.

Please click the ‘ACCEPT’ button if you understand and accept the foregoing statement and wish to proceed.



+ -