The Michigan Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in 167737 People of MI v Freddie Wilkins, III on Wednesday, Oct. 15 at Big Rapids High School as part of the Court Community Connections program.
Students will participate in a pre-argument briefing with local attorneys and a post-argument debrief led by Michigan Supreme Court Commissioners.
A community reception will follow the session.
The court offered the following summary on the case:
On June 3, 2021, police found methamphetamine (meth) in the defendant’s possession during a traffic stop. He was arrested and charged with possession of meth, but was released on bond.
On Jan. 29, 2022, the defendant was arrested for absconding from parole, related to a drug-possession conviction from 2019.
While he was in the booking area of the Branch County Jail, a package of meth fell out of his pocket. He had two outstanding cases at the time of his booking for which he was out on bond, including the possession of meth charge.
As a consequence of the meth dropping from his pocket, another case was initiated.
As part of a plea agreement to resolve all of the pending cases, the defendant entered a guilty plea to knowingly or intentionally possessing meth, MCL 333.7403(2)(b)(i) arising from his arrest on
June 3, 2021.
The charges arising from the separate case related to dropping the meth while the defendant was waiting to be booked were dismissed as part of the plea agreement.
The trial court then sentenced the defendant to serve 38 months to 12 years in prison for the possession conviction.
The trial court assigned 25 points to Offense Variable 19 (OV 19), MCL 777.49(a), on the basis that the defendant threatened the security of a penal institution when he dropped meth in the jail’s booking area while he was on bond for the possession of meth charge.
The defendant sought leave to appeal in the Court of Appeals, challenging the scoring of OV 19 on the grounds that: (1) he was not in the jail when the meth fell out of his pocket in the booking area; (2) he could not be scored 25 points using conduct that formed the basis of a crime that the prosecutor dismissed as part of a plea deal; and (3) he did not endanger the penal institution because he warned officers about the presence of the meth.
The Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal and affirmed the trial court’s scoring of OV 19 in an unpublished opinion, holding that: (1) facilities used for booking constitute an important component of the detention facility such that the defendant was legally in jail; (2) although this was post-offense conduct, the defendant was in the administration of justice phase when the meth fell out of his pocket; and (3) his warnings to officers that he had drugs did not diminish the risk to the facility.
The Supreme Court has ordered oral argument on the application to address whether the Branch Circuit Court properly assigned 25 points to Offense Variable 19, MCL 777.49(a).
In addition to hearing oral arguments at the Michigan Hall of Justice in Lansing, justices and staff travel to communities statewide as part of the "Court Community Connections" program, which the Court started as a public education program aimed primarily at high school students.
This will be the 32nd time the Court has traveled to hear a case at another location.
Students will participate in a pre-argument briefing with local attorneys and a post-argument debrief led by Michigan Supreme Court Commissioners.
A community reception will follow the session.
The court offered the following summary on the case:
On June 3, 2021, police found methamphetamine (meth) in the defendant’s possession during a traffic stop. He was arrested and charged with possession of meth, but was released on bond.
On Jan. 29, 2022, the defendant was arrested for absconding from parole, related to a drug-possession conviction from 2019.
While he was in the booking area of the Branch County Jail, a package of meth fell out of his pocket. He had two outstanding cases at the time of his booking for which he was out on bond, including the possession of meth charge.
As a consequence of the meth dropping from his pocket, another case was initiated.
As part of a plea agreement to resolve all of the pending cases, the defendant entered a guilty plea to knowingly or intentionally possessing meth, MCL 333.7403(2)(b)(i) arising from his arrest on
June 3, 2021.
The charges arising from the separate case related to dropping the meth while the defendant was waiting to be booked were dismissed as part of the plea agreement.
The trial court then sentenced the defendant to serve 38 months to 12 years in prison for the possession conviction.
The trial court assigned 25 points to Offense Variable 19 (OV 19), MCL 777.49(a), on the basis that the defendant threatened the security of a penal institution when he dropped meth in the jail’s booking area while he was on bond for the possession of meth charge.
The defendant sought leave to appeal in the Court of Appeals, challenging the scoring of OV 19 on the grounds that: (1) he was not in the jail when the meth fell out of his pocket in the booking area; (2) he could not be scored 25 points using conduct that formed the basis of a crime that the prosecutor dismissed as part of a plea deal; and (3) he did not endanger the penal institution because he warned officers about the presence of the meth.
The Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal and affirmed the trial court’s scoring of OV 19 in an unpublished opinion, holding that: (1) facilities used for booking constitute an important component of the detention facility such that the defendant was legally in jail; (2) although this was post-offense conduct, the defendant was in the administration of justice phase when the meth fell out of his pocket; and (3) his warnings to officers that he had drugs did not diminish the risk to the facility.
The Supreme Court has ordered oral argument on the application to address whether the Branch Circuit Court properly assigned 25 points to Offense Variable 19, MCL 777.49(a).
In addition to hearing oral arguments at the Michigan Hall of Justice in Lansing, justices and staff travel to communities statewide as part of the "Court Community Connections" program, which the Court started as a public education program aimed primarily at high school students.
This will be the 32nd time the Court has traveled to hear a case at another location.
