Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 777 / Act 175 of 1927
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44 (2026)

Offender's role.

✓ current as of July 2026 Cite as: Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44 (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


777.44 Offender's role.

Sec. 44.

    (1) Offense variable 14 is the offender's role. Score offense variable 14 by determining which of the following apply and by assigning the number of points attributable to the one that has the highest number of points:

    

    (a) The offender was a leader in a multiple offender situation

    10 points

    (b) The offender was not a leader in a multiple offender situation

    0 points

    (2) All of the following apply to scoring offense variable 14:

    (a) The entire criminal transaction should be considered when scoring this variable.

    (b) If 3 or more offenders were involved, more than 1 offender may be determined to have been a leader.

    

History: Add. 1998, Act 317, Eff. Dec. 15, 1998

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 183 cases (40 in the last 5 years), 2004–2026 · leading case: People v. McGraw
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. McGraw (2009) mich · cites it 6× “For instance, MCL 777.44(2)(a) provides that when scoring OV 14 (whether the offender was a leader in a multiple-offender situation), "the entire criminal transaction should be considered.”
People v. Ackah-Essien (2015) michctapp · cites it 5× “” The trial court properly assessed 15 points for OV 10 on the basis of the exploitation of a vulnerable victim involving predatory conduct.”
People v. Hardy; People v. Glenn (2013) mich · cites it 2× “38; and OV 14, MCL 777.44. In my view, these aspects of the sentencing guidelines bolster the conclusion that the majority errs in this case.”
People of Michigan v. Vicki Renee Dickinson (2017) michctapp · cites it 2× “MCL 777.44 describes when and how OV 14 is to be scored: (1) Offense variable 14 is the offender's role.”
People v. Gibbs (2013) michctapp · cites it 3× “” MCL 777.44(1). The sentencing court must assess 10 points if ££[t]he offender was a leader in a multiple offender situation.”
People v. Lockett (2012) michctapp · cites it 2× “MCL 777.44(2)(a); Apgar, 264 Mich App at 330 .”
People v. Apgar (2005) michctapp · cites it 4× “§ 777.44(1)(a). We view the entire criminal episode when determining if an offender was a leader in *319 a multiple offender situation.”
People v. Smith (2008) mich · cites it 2× “43(1)(a); OV 14 (offender's role) (10 points), MCL 777.44(1)(a); OV 19 (security threats or interference with justice) (25 points), MCL 777.”
People v. Jones (2013) michctapp · cites it 4× “Defendant’s only claim on appeal is that the trial court erred by assessing 10 points for offense variable (OV) 14 (offender’s role), MCL 777.44, on the basis of its conclusion that defendant was a leader in a “multiple *286 offender situation.”
People v. Morson (2004) mich · cites it 2× “For instance, MCL 777.44(2)(a) provides that in scoring OV 14 (whether the offender was a leader in a multiple offender situation), "[t]he entire criminal transaction should be considered.”
People v. Rhodes (2014) michctapp · cites it 2× “” MCL 777.44. We affirmed the trial court’s score of 10 points in reliance on People v Davis, 300 Mich App 502, 508 ; 834 NW2d 897 (2013), wherein this Court held that a trial court’s sentencing decision would not be considered clearly erroneous if any evidence in the record…”
People v. Smith (2010) mich · cites it 2× “43(2)(a) allows scoring of OV 13 using “all crimes within a 5-year period,” MCL 777.”
Show all 183 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(1) — 35 cases
People v. Gibbs (2013) michctapp “” MCL 777.44(1). The sentencing court must assess 10 points if ££[t]he offender was a leader in a multiple offender situation.”
People v. Ackah-Essien (2015) michctapp “” The trial court properly assessed 15 points for OV 10 on the basis of the exploitation of a vulnerable victim involving predatory conduct.”
People of Michigan v. Alana Georgienne Gonzalez (2024) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Mario Duane Brown (2016) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Marvin Lamar Wilburn (2016) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(1)(a) — 133 cases
People v. Ackah-Essien (2015) michctapp “” The trial court properly assessed 15 points for OV 10 on the basis of the exploitation of a vulnerable victim involving predatory conduct.”
People v. Smith (2008) mich “43(1)(a); OV 14 (offender's role) (10 points), MCL 777.44(1)(a); OV 19 (security threats or interference with justice) (25 points), MCL 777.”
People v. Gibbs (2013) michctapp “” MCL 777.44(1). The sentencing court must assess 10 points if ££[t]he offender was a leader in a multiple offender situation.”
People v. Apgar (2005) michctapp “§ 777.44(1)(a). We view the entire criminal episode when determining if an offender was a leader in *319 a multiple offender situation.”
People v. Houston (2004) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(1)(b) — 10 cases
People of Michigan v. Joel Irwing Wilson (2017) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Joel Irwing Wilson (2017) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Tod Kevin Houthoofd (2018) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Derrius Javonte Thornton (2019) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Gregory Michael Perry (2021) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(2) — 4 cases
People v. Rhodes (2014) michctapp “” MCL 777.44. We affirmed the trial court’s score of 10 points in reliance on People v Davis, 300 Mich App 502, 508 ; 834 NW2d 897 (2013), wherein this Court held that a trial court’s sentencing decision would not be considered clearly erroneous if any evidence in the record…”
People of Michigan v. Fakher Haydar Al-Yasiry (2016) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Lakeshia Tulani Peete (2017) michctapp
People of Michigan v. John Anthony Merchant (2015) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(2)(a) — 85 cases
People v. McGraw (2009) mich “For instance, MCL 777.44(2)(a) provides that when scoring OV 14 (whether the offender was a leader in a multiple-offender situation), "the entire criminal transaction should be considered.”
People v. Morson (2004) mich “For instance, MCL 777.44(2)(a) provides that in scoring OV 14 (whether the offender was a leader in a multiple offender situation), "[t]he entire criminal transaction should be considered.”
People of Michigan v. Vicki Renee Dickinson (2017) michctapp “MCL 777.44 describes when and how OV 14 is to be scored: (1) Offense variable 14 is the offender's role.”
People v. Smith (2010) mich “43(2)(a) allows scoring of OV 13 using “all crimes within a 5-year period,” MCL 777.”
People v. Lockett (2012) michctapp “MCL 777.44(2)(a); Apgar, 264 Mich App at 330 .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(2)(b) — 27 cases
People of Michigan v. David Ross Ames (2017) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Matthew Leslie Lott (2017) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Matthew Leslie Lott (2017) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Roberto Marcello Dupree (2023) mich
People of Michigan v. Charles Anthony Douglas (2023) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(3) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Tod Kevin Houthoofd (2018) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(41)(a) — 1 case
People v. Smith (2008) mich “43(1)(a); OV 14 (offender's role) (10 points), MCL 777.44(1)(a); OV 19 (security threats or interference with justice) (25 points), MCL 777.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(a) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Donald James Swank (2019) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(b) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Donald James Swank (2019) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(b)(2) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Donald James Swank (2019) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.44(l)(a) — 3 cases
People v. Lockett (2012) michctapp “MCL 777.44(2)(a); Apgar, 264 Mich App at 330 .”
People v. Ackah-Essien (2015) michctapp “” The trial court properly assessed 15 points for OV 10 on the basis of the exploitation of a vulnerable victim involving predatory conduct.”
People v. Apgar (2005) michctapp “§ 777.44(1)(a). We view the entire criminal episode when determining if an offender was a leader in *319 a multiple offender situation.”
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.