People of Michigan v. Monica Marie Stevens
328097
| Mich. Ct. App. | Nov 29, 2016Background
- Defendant Monica Marie Stevens, a fifth-time multiple drunk-driving offender, was sentenced above the Michigan guidelines range (recommended 0–13 months) to 22–90 months’ imprisonment.
- Trial court imposed an upward departure of nine months, citing extensive alcohol-related criminal history, very high BAC (about three times the legal limit), prior failed treatments, lack of acceptance of responsibility, and low likelihood of rehabilitation.
- Defendant did not challenge the scoring of offense variables (OVs) below or assert an Alleyne-type claim at sentencing.
- The legal question centers on whether, after People v Lockridge, an upward-departure sentence where OVs were not challenged requires remand (or a Crosby remand) for resentencing/Crosby hearing.
- Judge O’Connell (dissenting) argues Lockridge controls, plain-error review applies, no plain error occurred, and therefore no remand or Crosby hearing is required.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendant is entitled to remand/Crosby hearing for resentencing under Lockridge when OVs were not challenged and court imposed an upward departure | People: No remand; where OVs weren’t challenged and court made an upward departure with on-the-record reasons, Lockridge requires plain-error review and no Crosby remand if no plain error | Stevens: Remand required (rely on appellate decisions like Steanhouse that ordered resentencing post-Lockridge) | Dissent: Follow Lockridge — review for plain error; no plain error shown; no remand or Crosby hearing required |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Lockridge, 498 Mich 358 (2015) (holding guidelines advisory post-Alleyne and describing plain-error review where defendant did not preserve an Alleyne challenge)
- People v. Steanhouse, 313 Mich App 1 (2015) (Court of Appeals decision that remanded for resentencing despite an upward departure; criticized as inconsistent with Lockridge)
- United States v. Crosby, 397 F.3d 103 (2d Cir. 2005) (procedure for remanding to determine whether prejudice resulted from sentencing error)
- People v. Milbourn, 435 Mich 630 (1990) (governing proportionality review for departures and abuse-of-discretion standard)
- People v. Masroor, 313 Mich App 358 (2015) (sets abuse-of-discretion and proportionality review standard for upward departures)