Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 769 / Act 175 of 1927
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34 (2026)

Sentencing guidelines; duties of court.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE


Act 175 of 1927


769.34 Sentencing guidelines; duties of court.

Sec. 34.

    (1) The sentencing guidelines promulgated by order of the Michigan supreme court do not apply to felonies enumerated in part 2 of chapter XVII committed on or after January 1, 1999.

    (2) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection or for a departure from the appropriate minimum sentence range provided for under subsection (3), the minimum sentence imposed by a court of this state for a felony enumerated in part 2 of chapter XVII committed on or after January 1, 1999 may be within the appropriate sentence range under the version of those sentencing guidelines in effect on the date the crime was committed. Both of the following apply to minimum sentences under this subsection:

    (a) If a statute mandates a minimum sentence for an individual sentenced to the jurisdiction of the department of corrections, the court shall impose a sentence in accordance with that statute. Imposing a mandatory minimum sentence is not a departure under this section. If a statute mandates a minimum sentence for an individual sentenced to the jurisdiction of the department of corrections and the statute authorizes the sentencing judge to depart from that minimum sentence, imposing a sentence that exceeds the recommended sentence range but is less than the mandatory minimum sentence is not a departure under this section. If the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.1 to 257.923, mandates a minimum sentence for an individual sentenced to the jurisdiction of the department of corrections and the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.1 to 257.923, authorizes the sentencing judge to impose a sentence that is less than that minimum sentence, imposing a sentence that exceeds the recommended sentence range but is less than the mandatory minimum sentence is not a departure under this section.

    (b) The court shall not impose a minimum sentence, including a departure, that exceeds 2/3 of the statutory maximum sentence.

    (3) A court may depart from the appropriate sentence range established under the sentencing guidelines set forth in chapter XVII if the departure is reasonable and the court states on the record the reasons for departure. All of the following apply to a departure:

    (a) The court shall not use an individual's gender, race, ethnicity, alienage, national origin, legal occupation, lack of employment, representation by appointed legal counsel, representation by retained legal counsel, appearance in propria persona, or religion to depart from the appropriate sentence range.

    (b) The court shall not base a departure on an offense characteristic or offender characteristic already taken into account in determining the appropriate sentence range unless the court finds from the facts contained in the court record, including the presentence investigation report, that the characteristic has been given inadequate or disproportionate weight.

    (4) Intermediate sanctions must be imposed under this chapter as follows:

    (a) If the upper limit of the recommended minimum sentence range for a defendant determined under the sentencing guidelines set forth in chapter XVII is 18 months or less, the court shall impose an intermediate sanction unless the court states on the record reasonable grounds to sentence the individual to incarceration in a county jail for not more than 12 months or to the jurisdiction of the department of corrections for any sentence over 12 months.

    (b) If an attempt to commit a felony designated in offense class H in part 2 of chapter XVII is punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year, the court shall impose an intermediate sanction upon conviction of that offense absent a departure.

    (c) If the upper limit of the recommended minimum sentence exceeds 18 months and the lower limit of the recommended minimum sentence is 12 months or less, the court shall sentence the offender as follows absent a departure:

    (i) To imprisonment with a minimum term within that range.

    (ii) To an intermediate sanction with or without a term of jail incarceration of not more than 12 months.

    (5) If a crime has a mandatory determinant penalty or a mandatory penalty of life imprisonment, the court shall impose that penalty. This section does not apply to sentencing for that crime.

    (6) As part of the sentence, the court may also order the defendant to pay any combination of a fine, costs, or applicable assessments. The court shall order payment of restitution as provided by law.

    (7) If the trial court imposes on a defendant a minimum sentence that is longer or more severe than the appropriate sentence range, as part of the court's advice of the defendant's rights concerning appeal, the court shall advise the defendant orally and in writing that he or she may appeal the sentence as provided by law on grounds that it is longer or more severe than the appropriate sentence range.

    (8) All of the following must be part of the record filed for an appeal of a sentence under this section:

    (a) An entire record of the sentencing proceedings.

    (b) The presentence investigation report. Any portion of the presentence investigation report exempt from disclosure by law is not a public record.

    (c) Any other reports or documents the sentencing court used in imposing sentence.

    (9) An appeal of a sentence under this section does not stay execution of the sentence.

    (10) If a minimum sentence is within the appropriate guidelines sentence range, the court of appeals shall affirm that sentence and shall not remand for resentencing absent an error in scoring the sentencing guidelines or inaccurate information relied upon in determining the defendant's sentence. A party shall not raise on appeal an issue challenging the scoring of the sentencing guidelines or challenging the accuracy of information relied upon in determining a sentence that is within the appropriate guidelines sentence range unless the party has raised the issue at sentencing, in a proper motion for resentencing, or in a proper motion to remand filed in the court of appeals.

    (11) Time served on the sentence appealed under this section is considered time served on any sentence imposed after remand.

    

History: Add. 1994, Act 445, Eff. Dec. 15, 1998 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 317, Eff. Dec. 15, 1998 ;-- Am. 1999, Act 227, Imd. Eff. Dec. 28, 1999 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 279, Eff. Oct. 1, 2000 ;-- Am. 2002, Act 666, Eff. Mar. 1, 2003 ;-- Am. 2020, Act 395, Eff. Mar. 24, 2021

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,145 cases (265 in the last 5 years), 1995–2026 · leading case: People v. Babcock
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Babcock, 666 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 2003). · cites it 92× “After remand, in a published decision ( Babcock II ), the Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence, having concluded that, although some factors cited by the trial court were not objective and verifiable, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in departing from the…”
People v. Smith, 754 N.W.2d 284 (Mich. 2008). · cites it 105× “RESPONSE TO JUSTICE CORRIGAN'S DISSENT Contrary to Justice Corrigan's assertion, our approach is completely consistent with Babcock and the language of MCL 769.34. We emphasize in this opinion a point that was made in Babcock.”
People v. Lockridge, 870 N.W.2d 502 (Mich. 2015). · cites it 43× “Accordingly, we hold that he 1 To the extent that any part of MCL 769.34 or another statute refers to use of the sentencing guidelines as mandatory or refers to departures from the guidelines, that part or statute is also severed or struck down as necessary.”
People v. Harper, 739 N.W.2d 523 (Mich. 2007). · cites it 96× “MCL 769.34 governs the courts' application of the guidelines and consistently addresses the minimum sentence range.”
People v. Jackson, 790 N.W.2d 340 (Mich. 2010). · cites it 82× “Court of Appeals remands for resentencing are governed by MCL 769.34, which requires that cases be remanded when the sentence is based on inaccurate information.”
People v. McCuller, 739 N.W.2d 563 (Mich. 2007). · cites it 86× “MCL 769.34(2). The sentencing court determines a defendant's minimum sentence range by considering together the OVs, the PRVs, and the offense class.”
People v. Schrauben, 886 N.W.2d 173 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 16× “However, our -5- Supreme Court in Lockridge specifically stated that any part of MCL 769.34 that refers to the guidelines as mandatory or refers to departures from the guidelines is severed or struck down.”
People v. Francisco, 711 N.W.2d 44 (Mich. 2006). · cites it 22× “MCL 769.34(10) states, "[i]f a minimum sentence is within the appropriate guidelines sentence range, the court of appeals shall affirm that sentence and shall not remand for resentencing absent an error in scoring the sentencing guidelines or inaccurate information relied upon…”
People v. Lowe, 773 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2009). · cites it 49× “7413(2) should be interpreted to authorize trial courts to enhance only the maximum sentence for repeat drug offenders because such interpretation avoids a "potential conflict" between § 7413(2) and MCL 769.”
People v. Babcock, 624 N.W.2d 479 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 56× “§ 769.34; MSA 28.1097(3.4). This statute codifies the new sentencing guidelines applicable to crimes committed on or after January 1, 1999, M.”
People v. Wilcox, 781 N.W.2d 784 (Mich. 2010). · cites it 56× “MCL 769.34(2) describes the offenses to which the sentencing guidelines apply: Except as otherwise provided in this subsection or for a departure from the appropriate minimum sentence range provided for under subsection (3), the minimum sentence imposed by a court of this state…”
People v. Kimble, 684 N.W.2d 669 (Mich. 2004). · cites it 20× “§ 769.34(10) provides: If a minimum sentence is within the appropriate guidelines sentence range, the court of appeals shall affirm that sentence and shall not remand for resentencing absent an error in scoring the sentencing guidelines or inaccurate information relied upon in…”
Show all 1,145 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(1) — 29 cases
People v. Babcock, 624 N.W.2d 479 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 769.34; MSA 28.1097(3.4). This statute codifies the new sentencing guidelines applicable to crimes committed on or after January 1, 1999, M.”
People v. Gonzalez, 663 N.W.2d 499 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
People v. Dobek, 732 N.W.2d 546 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
People v. Payne, 774 N.W.2d 714 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009).
People v. Solmonson, 683 N.W.2d 761 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(10) — 595 cases
People v. Jackson, 790 N.W.2d 340 (Mich. 2010). “Court of Appeals remands for resentencing are governed by MCL 769.34, which requires that cases be remanded when the sentence is based on inaccurate information.”
People v. Francisco, 711 N.W.2d 44 (Mich. 2006). “MCL 769.34(10) states, "[i]f a minimum sentence is within the appropriate guidelines sentence range, the court of appeals shall affirm that sentence and shall not remand for resentencing absent an error in scoring the sentencing guidelines or inaccurate information relied upon…”
People v. Kimble, 684 N.W.2d 669 (Mich. 2004). “§ 769.34(10) provides: If a minimum sentence is within the appropriate guidelines sentence range, the court of appeals shall affirm that sentence and shall not remand for resentencing absent an error in scoring the sentencing guidelines or inaccurate information relied upon in…”
People v. Babcock, 666 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 2003). “After remand, in a published decision ( Babcock II ), the Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence, having concluded that, although some factors cited by the trial court were not objective and verifiable, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in departing from the…”
People v. Kimble, 651 N.W.2d 798 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(11) — 15 cases
People v. Babcock, 666 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 2003). “After remand, in a published decision ( Babcock II ), the Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence, having concluded that, although some factors cited by the trial court were not objective and verifiable, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in departing from the…”
People v. Smith, 754 N.W.2d 284 (Mich. 2008). “RESPONSE TO JUSTICE CORRIGAN'S DISSENT Contrary to Justice Corrigan's assertion, our approach is completely consistent with Babcock and the language of MCL 769.34. We emphasize in this opinion a point that was made in Babcock.”
People v. Babcock, 624 N.W.2d 479 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 769.34; MSA 28.1097(3.4). This statute codifies the new sentencing guidelines applicable to crimes committed on or after January 1, 1999, M.”
People v. Harper, 739 N.W.2d 523 (Mich. 2007). “MCL 769.34 governs the courts' application of the guidelines and consistently addresses the minimum sentence range.”
People v. Skinner, 917 N.W.2d 292 (Mich. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(12) — 3 cases
People v. McDaniel, 746 N.W.2d 867 (Mich. 2008).
People of Michigan v. Karon Cortez Crenshaw (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
People of Michigan v. Darius Rush (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(2) — 233 cases
People v. Lowe, 773 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2009). “7413(2) should be interpreted to authorize trial courts to enhance only the maximum sentence for repeat drug offenders because such interpretation avoids a "potential conflict" between § 7413(2) and MCL 769.”
People v. Lockridge, 870 N.W.2d 502 (Mich. 2015). “Accordingly, we hold that he 1 To the extent that any part of MCL 769.34 or another statute refers to use of the sentencing guidelines as mandatory or refers to departures from the guidelines, that part or statute is also severed or struck down as necessary.”
People v. Peltola, 803 N.W.2d 140 (Mich. 2011).
People v. Babcock, 666 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 2003). “After remand, in a published decision ( Babcock II ), the Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence, having concluded that, although some factors cited by the trial court were not objective and verifiable, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in departing from the…”
People v. Wilcox, 781 N.W.2d 784 (Mich. 2010). “MCL 769.34(2) describes the offenses to which the sentencing guidelines apply: Except as otherwise provided in this subsection or for a departure from the appropriate minimum sentence range provided for under subsection (3), the minimum sentence imposed by a court of this state…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(2)(a) — 41 cases
People v. Wilcox, 781 N.W.2d 784 (Mich. 2010). “MCL 769.34(2) describes the offenses to which the sentencing guidelines apply: Except as otherwise provided in this subsection or for a departure from the appropriate minimum sentence range provided for under subsection (3), the minimum sentence imposed by a court of this state…”
People v. Lockridge, 870 N.W.2d 502 (Mich. 2015). “Accordingly, we hold that he 1 To the extent that any part of MCL 769.34 or another statute refers to use of the sentencing guidelines as mandatory or refers to departures from the guidelines, that part or statute is also severed or struck down as necessary.”
People v. Claypool, 684 N.W.2d 278 (Mich. 2004).
People v. Lowe, 773 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2009). “7413(2) should be interpreted to authorize trial courts to enhance only the maximum sentence for repeat drug offenders because such interpretation avoids a "potential conflict" between § 7413(2) and MCL 769.”
People v. Payne, 850 N.W.2d 601 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(2)(b) — 71 cases
People v. Lockridge, 870 N.W.2d 502 (Mich. 2015). “Accordingly, we hold that he 1 To the extent that any part of MCL 769.34 or another statute refers to use of the sentencing guidelines as mandatory or refers to departures from the guidelines, that part or statute is also severed or struck down as necessary.”
People v. Babcock, 666 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 2003). “After remand, in a published decision ( Babcock II ), the Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence, having concluded that, although some factors cited by the trial court were not objective and verifiable, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in departing from the…”
People v. Smith, 754 N.W.2d 284 (Mich. 2008). “RESPONSE TO JUSTICE CORRIGAN'S DISSENT Contrary to Justice Corrigan's assertion, our approach is completely consistent with Babcock and the language of MCL 769.34. We emphasize in this opinion a point that was made in Babcock.”
People v. Babcock, 624 N.W.2d 479 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 769.34; MSA 28.1097(3.4). This statute codifies the new sentencing guidelines applicable to crimes committed on or after January 1, 1999, M.”
People v. Wilcox, 781 N.W.2d 784 (Mich. 2010). “MCL 769.34(2) describes the offenses to which the sentencing guidelines apply: Except as otherwise provided in this subsection or for a departure from the appropriate minimum sentence range provided for under subsection (3), the minimum sentence imposed by a court of this state…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(3) — 257 cases
People v. Babcock, 666 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 2003). “After remand, in a published decision ( Babcock II ), the Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence, having concluded that, although some factors cited by the trial court were not objective and verifiable, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in departing from the…”
People v. Smith, 754 N.W.2d 284 (Mich. 2008). “RESPONSE TO JUSTICE CORRIGAN'S DISSENT Contrary to Justice Corrigan's assertion, our approach is completely consistent with Babcock and the language of MCL 769.34. We emphasize in this opinion a point that was made in Babcock.”
People v. Lockridge, 870 N.W.2d 502 (Mich. 2015). “Accordingly, we hold that he 1 To the extent that any part of MCL 769.34 or another statute refers to use of the sentencing guidelines as mandatory or refers to departures from the guidelines, that part or statute is also severed or struck down as necessary.”
People v. Claypool, 684 N.W.2d 278 (Mich. 2004).
People v. Babcock, 624 N.W.2d 479 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 769.34; MSA 28.1097(3.4). This statute codifies the new sentencing guidelines applicable to crimes committed on or after January 1, 1999, M.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(3)(10) — 1 case
Jones v. Taskila (E.D. Mich. 2021).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(3)(a) — 25 cases
People v. Smith, 754 N.W.2d 284 (Mich. 2008). “RESPONSE TO JUSTICE CORRIGAN'S DISSENT Contrary to Justice Corrigan's assertion, our approach is completely consistent with Babcock and the language of MCL 769.34. We emphasize in this opinion a point that was made in Babcock.”
People v. Harper, 739 N.W.2d 523 (Mich. 2007). “MCL 769.34 governs the courts' application of the guidelines and consistently addresses the minimum sentence range.”
People v. Hornsby, 650 N.W.2d 700 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
People v. Young, 740 N.W.2d 347 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
People v. Lowery, 673 N.W.2d 107 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(3)(b) — 83 cases
People v. Smith, 754 N.W.2d 284 (Mich. 2008). “RESPONSE TO JUSTICE CORRIGAN'S DISSENT Contrary to Justice Corrigan's assertion, our approach is completely consistent with Babcock and the language of MCL 769.34. We emphasize in this opinion a point that was made in Babcock.”
People v. Babcock, 666 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 2003). “After remand, in a published decision ( Babcock II ), the Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence, having concluded that, although some factors cited by the trial court were not objective and verifiable, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in departing from the…”
People v. Babcock, 624 N.W.2d 479 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 769.34; MSA 28.1097(3.4). This statute codifies the new sentencing guidelines applicable to crimes committed on or after January 1, 1999, M.”
People v. Young, 740 N.W.2d 347 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
People v. Solmonson, 683 N.W.2d 761 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(4) — 29 cases
People v. Harper, 739 N.W.2d 523 (Mich. 2007). “MCL 769.34 governs the courts' application of the guidelines and consistently addresses the minimum sentence range.”
People v. McCuller, 739 N.W.2d 563 (Mich. 2007). “MCL 769.34(2). The sentencing court determines a defendant's minimum sentence range by considering together the OVs, the PRVs, and the offense class.”
People v. Schrauben, 886 N.W.2d 173 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). “However, our -5- Supreme Court in Lockridge specifically stated that any part of MCL 769.34 that refers to the guidelines as mandatory or refers to departures from the guidelines is severed or struck down.”
People v. McCuller, 715 N.W.2d 798 (Mich. 2006).
People v. Uphaus, 737 N.W.2d 519 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(4)(a) — 54 cases
People v. Harper, 739 N.W.2d 523 (Mich. 2007). “MCL 769.34 governs the courts' application of the guidelines and consistently addresses the minimum sentence range.”
People v. McCuller, 739 N.W.2d 563 (Mich. 2007). “MCL 769.34(2). The sentencing court determines a defendant's minimum sentence range by considering together the OVs, the PRVs, and the offense class.”
People v. Schrauben, 886 N.W.2d 173 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). “However, our -5- Supreme Court in Lockridge specifically stated that any part of MCL 769.34 that refers to the guidelines as mandatory or refers to departures from the guidelines is severed or struck down.”
People v. Drohan, 715 N.W.2d 778 (Mich. 2006).
People v. Uphaus, 748 N.W.2d 899 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(4)(b) — 2 cases
People v. Cooper, 652 N.W.2d 524 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
People v. Floyd, 697 N.W.2d 525 (Mich. 2005).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(4)(c) — 13 cases
People v. McCuller, 739 N.W.2d 563 (Mich. 2007). “MCL 769.34(2). The sentencing court determines a defendant's minimum sentence range by considering together the OVs, the PRVs, and the offense class.”
People v. McCuller, 715 N.W.2d 798 (Mich. 2006).
People v. Harper, 739 N.W.2d 523 (Mich. 2007). “MCL 769.34 governs the courts' application of the guidelines and consistently addresses the minimum sentence range.”
People v. Drohan, 715 N.W.2d 778 (Mich. 2006).
People v. Schaafsma, 704 N.W.2d 115 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(4)(c)(N) — 1 case
People v. Martin, 668 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(4)(c)(i) — 2 cases
People of Michigan v. Myron Davis (Mich. Ct. App. 2026).
People of Michigan v. Joshua Leonard Cano (Mich. Ct. App. 2026).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(4)(c)(ii) — 3 cases
People v. Martin, 668 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
People of Michigan v. Joshua Leonard Cano (Mich. Ct. App. 2026).
People of Michigan v. Richard Steven Gutierrez (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(4)(c)(n) — 1 case
People v. Martin, 668 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(4)(d) — 1 case
People v. Stauffer, 640 N.W.2d 869 (Mich. 2002).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(5) — 12 cases
People v. Brown, 811 N.W.2d 531 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011).
People v. Garza, 670 N.W.2d 662 (Mich. 2003).
People v. Izarraras-Placante, 633 N.W.2d 18 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001).
People v. Kircher, 764 N.W.2d 281 (Mich. 2009).
People of Michigan v. Taiwan Prater (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(6) — 8 cases
People v. Lloyd, 774 N.W.2d 347 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009).
People v. Gaines, 306 Mich. App. 289 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
People v. Cunningham, 852 N.W.2d 118 (Mich. 2014).
People v. Dilworth, 804 N.W.2d 788 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011).
People of Michigan v. Anthony Gayl Lake (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(7) — 9 cases
People v. Smith, 754 N.W.2d 284 (Mich. 2008). “RESPONSE TO JUSTICE CORRIGAN'S DISSENT Contrary to Justice Corrigan's assertion, our approach is completely consistent with Babcock and the language of MCL 769.34. We emphasize in this opinion a point that was made in Babcock.”
People v. McLaughlin, 672 N.W.2d 860 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
People v. Babcock, 624 N.W.2d 479 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 769.34; MSA 28.1097(3.4). This statute codifies the new sentencing guidelines applicable to crimes committed on or after January 1, 1999, M.”
People v. Garza, 670 N.W.2d 662 (Mich. 2003).
People v. Hicks, 675 N.W.2d 599 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(8)(b) — 2 cases
People v. Callon, 662 N.W.2d 501 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
20250123_C362122_77_362122.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(8)(c) — 1 case
People v. Callon, 662 N.W.2d 501 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(H) — 3 cases
People v. Babcock, 666 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 2003). “After remand, in a published decision ( Babcock II ), the Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence, having concluded that, although some factors cited by the trial court were not objective and verifiable, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in departing from the…”
People v. Harper, 739 N.W.2d 523 (Mich. 2007). “MCL 769.34 governs the courts' application of the guidelines and consistently addresses the minimum sentence range.”
People v. Babcock, 648 N.W.2d 221 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(b)(3) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Clarence Jovan Davison (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.34(c) — 2 cases
People of Michigan v. Armond Pinson (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
O People of Michigan v. Armond Pinson (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.