People of Michigan v. Justin Timothy Comer
901 N.W.2d 553
| Mich. | 2017Background
- Justin Comer pleaded guilty to first-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-I) and second-degree home invasion; the judgments omitted any notation requiring lifetime electronic monitoring (LEM).
- On initial sentencing and on resentencing after a Court of Appeals remand, the judgment forms contained an unchecked line about LEM; no party filed a motion to correct the sentence within the six-month rule period.
- The MDOC notified the trial court that Brantley required LEM for CSC-I; the trial court sua sponte held a hearing 19 months after sentencing and added “Lifetime GPS upon release from prison.”
- The Court of Appeals held the original sentence was invalid for failing to include statutorily mandated LEM and upheld the trial court’s late correction based on People v Harris.
- The Michigan Supreme Court granted review (in lieu of leave) to decide (1) whether MCL 750.520b(2)(d) mandates LEM for CSC-I convictions like Comer’s, and (2) whether a trial court may correct an invalid sentence on its own initiative after judgment has entered.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MCL 750.520b(2)(d) requires lifetime electronic monitoring for CSC-I convictions (except life-without-parole under §2(c)) | People: §520b(2)(d) mandates LEM for all CSC-I sentences not subject to life without parole (relying on Brantley) | Comer: §520n(1)’s age-based phrase limits LEM to offenses involving victims under 13 or offenders 17+, so his conviction need not carry LEM | Held: §520b(2)(d) requires LEM for all CSC-I sentences except those under §2(c); Comer’s sentence was invalid for omitting LEM. |
| Whether the trial court could correct the invalid sentence sua sponte 19 months after judgment | People/Trial court (invoking Harris): trial court may correct an invalid sentence at any time, so sua sponte correction was permissible | Comer: court rules (MCR 6.429, 6.435) require a party’s timely motion; court lacked authority to act after judgment without a motion | Held: Under MCR 6.435 and 6.429, a court may correct substantive mistakes sua sponte only before entry of judgment; after judgment a timely motion under MCR 6.429 is required. Harris overruled to the extent inconsistent. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Brantley, 296 Mich. App. 546 (Mich. Ct. App.) (Court of Appeals decision holding LEM required for CSC-I)
- People v. Harris, 224 Mich. App. 597 (Mich. Ct. App.) (held trial court could correct an invalid sentence without a motion and without time limits)
- People v. Cole, 491 Mich. 325 (Mich.) (plea-advice: direct consequences of a plea must be disclosed)
- People v. Lee, 489 Mich. 289 (Mich.) (interpretation of MCR 6.429 time limits for motions to correct sentence)
- People v. Miles, 454 Mich. 90 (Mich.) (discussing when a sentence is invalid and trial-court correction authority)