People of Michigan v. Michael Scott McNeal
351900
| Mich. Ct. App. | Jun 17, 2021Background
- In the early morning of July 24, 2018, Michael McNeal entered a trailer on his marital property and shot his wife multiple times, killing her; he conceded shooting but claimed heat-of-passion manslaughter.
- Their 17-year-old son, KM, was at home, heard the gunshots, discovered his mother’s body, feared for his life, and testified at trial about his observations and fear.
- McNeal was charged with first-degree premeditated murder and felony-firearm; a jury convicted him of second-degree murder and felony-firearm.
- The trial court sentenced McNeal to 540–900 months for second-degree murder and 24 months for felony-firearm.
- On appeal McNeal challenged: (1) the jury instructions and verdict form (arguing they foreclosed a general not-guilty verdict); (2) scoring 15 points for OV 5 (psychological injury to a victim’s family); and (3) the reasonableness of the upward departure sentence.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed on all issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Verdict form & jury instructions | Form and instructions properly allowed a general not-guilty verdict and permitted jurors to consider offenses sequentially and revisit counts. | Verdict form/instructions foreclosed a general not-guilty verdict on the homicide charge and obscured that option. | No plain error; verdict form included a discrete "Not Guilty" box and instructions appropriately allowed sequential consideration and returning to counts. |
| OV 5 scoring (psychological injury to family) | 15 points appropriate: KM’s testimony, demeanor, immediate fear, and the fact he saw the body supported a finding of serious psychological injury likely requiring treatment. | No record evidence family sustained serious psychological injury or sought treatment; scoring impermissibly assumes injury. | Affirmed: trial court’s factual determination (including observing KM’s demeanor) supported 15 points under a preponderance standard; treatment need not have begun pre-sentencing. |
| Upward departure / sentence reasonableness | Departure was reasonable and proportionate; trial court relied on offense seriousness, defendant’s prior similar 1992 assault (not scored under PRV due to 10-year rule), and lack of rehabilitation—court explained its findings. | Improper reliance on stale 1992 conviction despite PRV 10-year rule; failure to properly weigh remorse/rehab; sentence unreasonably disparate from guidelines. | Affirmed: departure was not unreasonable; PRV rule limits guideline scoring but does not bar consideration of prior conduct when justifying a departure; trial court made factual findings and explained proportionality. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Wade, 283 Mich. App. 462 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009) (verdict form must permit a general not-guilty verdict for the charge and lesser included offenses)
- People v Walker, 504 Mich. 267 (Mich. 2019) (plain-error review of unpreserved instructional claims)
- People v Riddle, 467 Mich. 116 (Mich. 2002) (defendant entitled to properly instructed jury)
- People v Hardy, 494 Mich. 430 (Mich. 2013) (standard of review for sentencing factual findings)
- People v Calloway, 500 Mich. 180 (Mich. 2017) (OV 5 scoring: consider severity, manifestation, and whether treatment sought)
- People v White, 501 Mich. 160 (Mich. 2017) (limits on assuming psychological injury; need evidence injury occurred)
- People v Lockridge, 498 Mich. 358 (Mich. 2015) (advisory nature of sentencing guidelines; reasonableness review of departures)
- People v Milbourn, 435 Mich. 630 (Mich. 1990) (departure review—look for circumstances not embodied in guidelines)
- People v Steanhouse, 500 Mich. 453 (Mich. 2017) (trial court may rely on witness demeanor and record evidence when scoring OVs)