People of Michigan v. Derek James Beach
330140
| Mich. Ct. App. | Apr 18, 2017Background
- On Jan. 24, 2015 two men robbed a Sunoco in Monroe, MI; Cody Wilson pleaded guilty to unarmed robbery and testified that defendant Derek Beach was the second robber who entered holding a gun.
- Store clerk Deborah Perry testified defendant pointed a black handgun with a large barrel at her; surveillance video was shown.
- Jury convicted Beach of armed robbery (MCL 750.529) but acquitted him of felony-firearm (MCL 750.227b).
- Police recovered cash, a carton of Newport cigarettes, and a coat matching the robber’s from the apartment of Beach’s wife where Beach was located.
- At sentencing the court scored OVs 1, 2, 4, and 14; assessed 10 points for OV 4 (psychological injury), resulting in an OV total that produced a higher guidelines range; the judgment also required SORA registration.
- Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, vacated the sentence (remanded for resentencing due to OV4 error), and held the SORA registration order was erroneous on the record presented.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for armed robbery given felony-firearm acquittal | Testimony and video show defendant pointed a gun and thereby possessed or represented a dangerous weapon | Acquittal on felony-firearm shows insufficient evidence to prove armed-robbery weapon element | Conviction affirmed: evidence supported armed-robbery elements; acquittal on felony-firearm not inconsistent with armed-robbery verdict |
| Admission of items recovered at wife’s apartment (cash, cigarettes, coat) | Items matched robbed property and coat matched surveillance; probative of participation | Foundation insufficient; prejudicial | Admission was not an abuse of discretion: items relevant and probative value not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice |
| Scoring of OVs 1, 2, 4, 14 (and effect on guidelines) | Court properly scored based on testimony, PSIR, and video; defendant was leader and used a firearm | OV4 (serious psychological injury) unsupported; other OV scores challenged | OV1, OV2, OV14 upheld; OV4 (10 pts) reversed — subtracting 10 points reduces OV level and guideline range; remand for resentencing under Lockridge |
| Requirement to register under SORA | Court ordered registration based on defendant’s prior HYTA disposition and PSIR warnings | Trial court erred: no record that HYTA conviction was a reportable conviction or was revoked; no stated basis at sentencing | Order to register under SORA vacated as unsupported by record; plain-error review finds error |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Chambers, 277 Mich. App. 1 (Mich. Ct. App.) (defines elements of armed robbery)
- People v. Lockridge, 498 Mich. 358 (Mich.) (held guidelines advisory; court must consider guidelines; judicial factfinding issue)
- People v. McChester, 310 Mich. App. 354 (Mich. Ct. App.) (PSIR statements that victim was "visibly shaken" insufficient for OV 4 scores)
- People v. Hardy, 494 Mich. 430 (Mich.) (standards for reviewing factual findings under sentencing guidelines)
- People v. Russell, 297 Mich. App. 707 (Mich. Ct. App.) (jury verdict inconsistency need not invalidate conviction)
- People v. Apgar, 264 Mich. App. 321 (Mich. Ct. App.) (contrast: OV4 upheld where brutal sexual assault produced severe psychological injury)