People of Michigan v. Robert Jerry Miles
343800
| Mich. Ct. App. | Jun 24, 2021Background
- Defendant Robert Jerry Miles was convicted by a jury of delivery of a controlled substance (less than 50 grams) and acquitted of delivery causing death; the trial court nonetheless found by a preponderance that his delivery caused the victim’s death.
- At sentencing the trial court scored OV 3 at 100 points (death resulting from the crime) and OV 12 at 5 points (contemporaneous felonious acts), producing a total OV score of 110 and an OV Level VI range; the court also imposed $500 in court costs.
- Defendant was sentenced as a fourth habitual offender to 5–40 years, consecutive to an earlier federal sentence.
- This Court initially affirmed, but the Michigan Supreme Court vacated parts of the opinion (re OV 3, OV 12, and costs) and remanded for reconsideration in light of People v. Beck and People v. Lewis.
- On remand the panel considered whether Beck prohibits reliance on acquitted conduct for OV scoring (OV 3 and OV 12) and whether Lewis/Johnson foreclose a facial challenge to MCL 769.1k(1)(b)(iii) (court costs).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether OV 3 (physical injury/death) may be scored based on a sentencing-court finding when the jury acquitted the defendant of delivery causing death | The People: trial court may find by a preponderance that death resulted from defendant's conduct for OV scoring | Miles: Beck bars using acquitted conduct at sentencing; court may not rely on jury-acquitted conduct to score OV 3 | Scoring OV 3 based on acquitted conduct violated due process under Beck; error requires resentencing |
| Whether OV 12 (contemporaneous felonious acts) may be scored here where the trial court relied on the same acquitted conduct | The People: OV 12 scoring was supported by the court's factual findings | Miles: OV 12 was premised on the same acquitted conduct and thus cannot be used under Beck | OV 12 scoring was also erroneous because it depended on acquitted conduct; points must be removed |
| Whether MCL 769.1k(1)(b)(iii) is facially unconstitutional (court costs) | The People: statute is constitutional; courts imposing costs does not create disqualifying bias | Miles: statute violates due process and separation of powers by creating financial interest in imposing costs | Following Johnson and Lewis, the statute is not facially unconstitutional and the $500 costs were properly imposed |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Beck, 504 Mich. 605 (2019) (due process bars sentencing courts from finding by a preponderance that a defendant engaged in conduct of which he was acquitted)
- People v. Cameron, 319 Mich. App. 215 (2017) (treats costs under MCL 769.1k as a tax and addresses Distinct Statement and separation concerns)
- People v. Light, 290 Mich. App. 717 (2010) (defines and analyzes contemporaneous felonious criminal acts for OV 12)
- Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927) (due-process precedent on judicial bias from financial interest)
- Dugan v. Ohio, 277 U.S. 61 (1928) (distinguishes circumstances where revenue recipients lack control over administration)
- Ward v. Village of Monroeville, Ohio, 409 U.S. 57 (1972) (mayor’s courts decision on judicial impartiality)
- Commonwealth of N. Mariana Islands v. Kaipat, 94 F.3d 574 (9th Cir. 1996) (distinguishes Tumey in revenue-related impartiality challenges)