From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Brown

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Mar 26, 2014
495 Mich. 962 (Mich. 2014)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

In People v Brown, 495 Mich. 962, 963 (2014), our Supreme Court vacated the trial court's imposition of seven consecutive sentences for CSC-I because, while the assaults occurred over 10 days, only "three sexual penetrations that resulted in those convictions ar[ose] from the same transaction.

Summary of this case from People v. Baldeh
See 7 Summaries

Opinion

Docket No. 147759. COA No. 308510.

2014-03-26

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Tommy BROWN, Defendant–Appellant.

Prior report: Mich.App., 2013 WL 3942486.

Order

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 30, 2013 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the sentences imposed by the Wayne Circuit Court for the defendant's first-degree criminal sexual conduct convictions, and we REMAND this case to the trial court for resentencing. The trial court imposed an invalid sentence when it imposed seven consecutive sentences for the defendant's seven convictions of first-degree criminal sexual conduct. Pursuant to MCL 750.520b(3), “The court may order a term of imprisonment imposed under this section to be served consecutively to any term of imprisonment imposed for any other criminal offense arising from the same transaction.” Having reviewed the record, we agree with the trial prosecutor who argued at sentencing that the trial court had discretion to impose consecutive sentences for at most three of the defendant's first-degree criminal sexual conduct convictions, because the three sexual penetrations that resulted in those convictions “ar[ose] from the same transaction.” That is, the three sexual penetrations “grew out of a continuous time sequence” and had “a connective relationship that was more than incidental.” People v. Ryan, 295 Mich.App. 388, 402–403, 819 N.W.2d 55 (2012). On remand, the trial court shall resentence the defendant in accordance with MCL 750.520b(3). In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

Summaries of

People v. Brown

Supreme Court of Michigan.
Mar 26, 2014
495 Mich. 962 (Mich. 2014)

In People v Brown, 495 Mich. 962, 963 (2014), our Supreme Court vacated the trial court's imposition of seven consecutive sentences for CSC-I because, while the assaults occurred over 10 days, only "three sexual penetrations that resulted in those convictions ar[ose] from the same transaction.

Summary of this case from People v. Baldeh

In People v Brown, 495 Mich. 962, 962-963; 843 N.W.2d 743 (2014), the Michigan Supreme Court addressed a similar issue and vacated the defendant's seven consecutive sentences for CSC-1 convictions.

Summary of this case from People v. Whalen

In Brown, the defendant was charged with, and convicted of, seven counts of CSC-I against his granddaughter, and the trial court imposed a consecutive sentence for each one.

Summary of this case from People v. Hinman

In People v Brown, 495 Mich 962, 963 (2014), the Supreme Court vacated the trial court's order that defendant serve each of his seven sentences for CSC-I consecutively, directing that only three of the sentences could be imposed consecutively as arising from the same transaction.

Summary of this case from People v. Hinman

In People v Brown, 495 Mich 962 (2014), the Court applied the same reasoning when it vacated the defendant's seven consecutive sentences for CSC-I convictions.

Summary of this case from People v. Harper

In Brown, the defendant was charged with, and convicted of, seven counts of CSC–I against his granddaughter, and the trial court imposed a consecutive sentence for each one.

Summary of this case from People v. Bailey

In People v. Brown, 495 Mich. 962, 963, 843 N.W.2d 743 (2014), the Supreme Court vacated the trial court's order that defendant serve each of his seven sentences for CSC–I consecutively, directing that only three of the sentences could be imposed consecutively as arising from the same transaction.

Summary of this case from People v. Bailey
Case details for

People v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Tommy BROWN…

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan.

Date published: Mar 26, 2014

Citations

495 Mich. 962 (Mich. 2014)
495 Mich. 962

Citing Cases

People v. Bailey

In Ryan, 295 Mich.App. at 393, 819 N.W.2d 55, we held that two acts of CSC–I occurred in the same transaction…

People v. Hinman

In Ryan, 295 Mich App at 393, we held that two acts of CSC-I occurred in the same transaction when, while the…

13 Citing Cases