People of Michigan v. Norvell Glenn Cooper
330932
| Mich. Ct. App. | Jun 27, 2017Background
- Defendant Norvell Glenn Cooper was convicted at a bench trial of armed robbery and sentenced as a second-offense habitual offender to 81 months to 15 years’ imprisonment.
- The sentencing guidelines range calculated for defendant was 81 to 168 months; the trial court imposed the bottom end (81 months) as the minimum sentence.
- The trial court ordered $2,600 restitution to victim Hassan Mansour based on a presentence report and victim statement claiming $1,500 cash and $1,100 for two cell phones.
- The court also imposed $400 in court-appointed attorney fees and signed a remittance order to garnish the prisoner account consistent with MCL 769.1l.
- Defendant appealed, challenging (1) sentence reasonableness/proportionality, (2) restitution as unsupported by documentary evidence, and (3) imposition of attorney fees without an ability-to-pay determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasonableness of sentence / proportionality | People argued the sentence was within guidelines and presumptively proportionate | Cooper argued sentence was unreasonable and disproportionate | Affirmed: minimum (81 months) fell within guidelines; no scoring challenge or inaccurate information shown, so no resentencing required |
| Restitution amount ($2,600) | People relied on presentence report and victim statement to prove loss; no dispute at sentencing | Cooper argued restitution unsupported by record and lacked documentary proof | Affirmed: issue unpreserved; absent dispute trial court may rely on presentence report; no plain error shown |
| Ability-to-pay attorney fees ($400) | People relied on statutory framework allowing imposition and remittance order; enforcement procedures provide opportunity to contest | Cooper argued court erred by imposing fees without first determining ability to pay | Affirmed: unpreserved; under Jackson trial court need not assess ability to pay at imposition stage and remittance order/garnishment procedures supply enforcement and contest mechanisms |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Milbourn, 435 Mich. 630 (sets proportionality standard for sentencing)
- People v. Steanhouse, 313 Mich. App. 1 (identifies factors for proportionality review)
- People v. Lockridge, 498 Mich. 358 (requires courts to consult guidelines; reviewed for reasonableness when departing)
- People v. Schrauben, 314 Mich. App. 181 (presumptively proportionate guidelines minimums remain valid)
- People v. Newton, 257 Mich. App. 61 (preservation requirement for restitution challenges)
- People v. Gubachy, 272 Mich. App. 706 (victim’s statutory right to restitution under CVRA)
- People v. Fawaz, 299 Mich. App. 55 (restitution must be based on actual loss and supported by evidence)
- People v. Grant, 455 Mich. 221 (trial court may rely on presentence report when restitution amount undisputed)
- People v. Jackson, 483 Mich. 271 (ability-to-pay assessment and enforcement procedure for court-appointed attorney fees)
- People v. Kowalski, 489 Mich. 488 (plain-error standard for unpreserved claims)