Careers

Experiences

Industries

Offices

Our Firm

Pages

Our People

Updates

Practices

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is a corporate law firm with over 230 attorneys serving clients in nine offices throughout Michigan. Among the largest law firms in Michigan, Warner works in virtually all areas of business law.

Michigan Law Firm - Warner Norcross + Judd LLP

In <a href="http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/OPINIONS/FINAL/COA/20170718_C333009_29_333009.OPN.PDF" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"><em>People v. Winters,</em> No. 333009</a>, the Court of Appeals held that telling a Defendant that the maximum possible sentence for attempted arson was longer than the correct maximum sentence did not prejudice the Defendant such that he would be allowed to withdraw his plea.

contentpilot/introduction

Defendant plead no contest to second-degree arson and attempted arson for burning and attempting to burn tents located at a homeless campsite and was sentenced for concurrent terms of eight to 40 years and two years and 10 months to 10 years respectively. Following the entry of his plea Defendant tried to withdraw his plea stating that the court did not comply with the rules for entry of a plea set forth under MCR 6.302, namely subrules (B)(2) and (B)(3). The trial court denied Defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea and Defendant appealed, citing abuse of discretion.

core/paragraph

MCR 6.302(B)(2) requires that a defendant be informed of his maximum prison sentence prior to a court’s acceptance of a plea. Defendant asserted, and the plaintiff did not contest, that he was misinformed by the court, which told him that the maximum term for attempted arson was 20 years rather than the correct maximum of 10 years. The Court of Appeals noted that a misstatement of a maximum possible sentence does not require reversal as long as it did not prejudice a defendant. In the case it hand, the Court held that stating a longer maximum than the correct maximum term did not prejudice the Defendant.

MCR 6.302(B)(3) requires a court to inform a defendant of the constitutionally protected rights the defendant will be relinquishing by accepting a plea. In the case at hand the Defendant signed an advice of rights form which recited the rights outlined under MCR 6.302(B)(3) verbatim. Defendant argues that MCR 6.302(B)(3) requires him to personally read the advice of rights form, which was not possible given his limited ability to read. However, the rights were read to him and he stated that he understood them and had no further questions. Defendant’s counsel also stated that the requirements of MCR 6.302(B)(3) were met and defendant voiced no disagreement. As such, the Court of Appeals found that the requirements of MCR 6.302(B)(3) were met.

Given these holdings, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court and refused to allow the Defendant to withdraw his plea.

Partner

Madelaine C. Lane

Labor and Employment

COA: Criminal defendant cannot withdraw plea even if court erroneously informed defendant that maximum possible sentence longer than correct maximum sentence

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is responsible for the contents of our advertising and this website. Please read our full <a href="/privacy-policy/" aria-label="see privacy policy">privacy policy</a> available on our website. If you have any questions or comments about our website or our Privacy Policy please contact us at <a href="mailto:info@wnj.com">info@wnj.com</a> or 616.752.2000. 

COA: Criminal defendant cannot withdraw plea even if court erroneously informed defendant that maximum possible sentence longer than correct maximum sentence

professionals