People V. Smith Case Analysis

500 Words2 Pages

Most states implement expunged laws; at the age of twenty-seven juveniles can have their record expunged. The purpose of the law is to allow juveniles become adults without having a criminal record. In the case of Docket No. 105833 People v. Smith, 448 NW2d 794, Michigan Supreme Court (1989), during the presentence investigation into Ricky Franklin Smith he was indicted on charges as an adolescent. Smith plead guilty to breaking and entering; the career criminal past decisions resulted in his incarceration. The defendant was considered a habitual offender; fourth offense. He appealed his rights and was awarded a resentence; Docket No. 87874 People v. Smith, 470 NW2d 70, Michigan Supreme Court (1991). Smith case was referenced to People v. Price …show more content…

Jones (1988) determined, expunged records can be included in presentence investigation and used during sentencing; however, the courts ruled expunged records are not to be used in the sentencing of People v. Price (1988). The panel believes in the case of People v. Smith, law enforcement should not have used Smiths expunged records on his presentence investigation. During, Smith’s presentence investigation it included his juvenile history. Those histories included twelve felonies as a juvenile. The trial judge admits the sentence was imposed; however, the report received included seven felonies and three misdemeanors. The judge agreed Smith’s sentence deemed appropriate and determined his sentencing will deter other youths as well as protecting the community. Despite the fact that Smith is already incarcerated the judge ruled Smith will serve his time concurrently with a prior sentencing. Facts are the panel believes the defendant is entitled to a resentencing. The defendant expunged records was viewed at the time of presentence and his sentence was determined because of his previous criminal history. The rule “*300 MCR 5.913, was in effect at the time Smith was sentenced, replaced by JCR 13. Shortly after the adoption of this rule, the Legislature enacted § 18e of the Juveniles and Juvenile Division Chapter of the Probate Code” The reals referenced in this case

Open Document