People V Smith Case Summary

578 Words2 Pages

The case of People v. Smith (1991) is a case settling the question of whether or not a past juvenile record could be used in the sentencing of an adult offender. The defendant, Ricky Franklin Smith, was convicted on his guilty plea to breaking and entering and being a habitual offender, fourth offense. His contention is that he should have been resentenced because the presentence investigation report contained an expunged juvenile record; he based his argument on Michigan Court Rules (MCR) MCR 5.913, now MCR 5.925(E) Expungement of Records, and believed that it could not be used and prejudiced the court.
His case made it to the Michigan Supreme Court which reversed the Court of Appeals decision, which was based on an earlier decision, People v. Price (1988), which ruled “that a juvenile record, automatically expunged pursuant to MCR 5.913 could not be considered at sentencing.” In Price, the court concluded… "[I]s delusive and purposeless if law enforcement agencies may continue to use supposedly expunged records against a defendant to his prejudice” (People v. Smith, p. 297, 1991).
The presentence investigation report in question outlined Smith's previous record, which included twelve juvenile entries. The sentencing judge imposed the sentence because Smith's record included seven prior felonies and three misdemeanors, and he viewed the sentence as …show more content…

McFarlin (1973) and People v. Jones (1988) and cited two key elements, "[m]odern sentencing policy attempts to tailor the sentence to the particular offender and the circumstances of the case" (People v. McFarlin, 1973) and "complete information is necessary to set an individualized sentence and that rehabilitative goals would not be served by preventing a sentencing judge from considering information about a defendant's juvenile criminal history" (People v. Jones, 1988). The Court concluded that the Jones decision was more appropriate and was the right

Open Document