Docket No. 314816, in a case where the trial judge sentenced the defendant to a 30 year to 50 year term of imprisonment in a case where the defendant was convicted of an offense carrying a 25-year mandatory minimum. In a per curiam opinion, the Court reversed on the sentencing issue and remanded the matter to the trial court for resentencing.
Payne, 17 1/2 years old at the time of the offense, was convicted following a jury trial of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree where the victim was less than 13 years old. The victim, a five-year-old boy, testified Payne had "stuck his pee-pee in my butt and it hurt." Payne, when confronted with the allegations by sheriff's deputies, initially denied the allegations but subsequently admitted to doing the act. The defense argued Payne, after suffering from years of mental health issues, was legally insane at the time of the offense. The jury convicted Payne as charged, specifically holding that he was not legally insane or guilty but mentally ill.
The primary issue on appeal was the defendant's sentence. The trial court sentenced the Payne to 30-50 years imprisonment. Payne argued on appeal that his sentence violated MCL 750.520b(2)(b) which, according to the defense, called for a flat 25-year term of imprisonment, and in order for a trial court to sentence him to a term in excess of that, the court would need to articulate substantial and compelling reasons for an upward departure.
The statute states that when a defendant who is 17 years of age or older is convicted of CSC-1 against a victim who is less than 13 years of age, the defendant shall be punished “by imprisonment for life or any term of years, but not less than 25 years.” The prosecution argued that the legislature's use of "not less than 25 years" gave sentencing courts authority to sentence defendants in excess of that minimum, but not less. However, the Court held that the Michigan Supreme Court had already ruled on the issue implicitly in 2010 in People v Wilcox, 486 Mich 60; 781 NW2d 784 (2010). There, the Supreme Court held that an analogous statute, MCL 750.520f(1), which called for a mandatory minimum 5 years of imprisonment for a second felony CSC offense, required a sentencing court to articulate substantial and compelling reasons for any upward departure from the mandatory minimum. According to the MSC, the guidelines applied to the defendant's offense. The guidelines require substantial and compelling reasons for any upward or downward departure. Mandatory minimums are exempt from guideline analysis, but only the mandatory minimum sentence is, not any deviation from that. Therefore, if a sentencing court deviates upward from a mandatory minimum, it must articulate substantial and compelling reasons to do so.
In this case, Payne's guidelines for the CSC 1st were calculated at 81-135 months. The statute called for a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years. The sentencing court, therefore, had two choices 1). sentence Payne to the mandatory minimum 25 years without articulating any substantial and compelling reasons, or 2) impose a sentence in excess of the flat 25 years and articulate substantial and compelling reasons for the upward departure and the extent of it. The trial court erred in doing neither of these options.
Michael Robie of Lawrence, Michigan represented the People in this appeal. Payne was represented by Christopher Smith of the State Appellate Defenders Office.