People v. McKernan

4 Citing cases

  1. People v. Cline

    276 Mich. App. 634 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 317 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that evidence that a person requires some level of personal care as a result of her conditions was sufficient evidence to establish that that person was a vulnerable adult

    The sentencing court's statement referenced by Judge O'CONNELL in Havens is arguably similar to the trial court's statement in the instant case that defendant has "gotta be kept away from society for a long time until there's a . . . reasonable belief that he can be safely returned to society." Defendant also cites People v McKernan, 185 Mich App 780, 782; 462 NW2d 843 (1990), quoting People v Fleming, 428 Mich 408, 424 n 17; 410 NW2d 266 (1987), in which this Court held that "`[a]ny predictions of a defendant's future behavior based on a status characteristic such as race, religion, gender, or age are suspect.'" McKernan stated that "`[a] reasonable sentence may include a limited consideration of defendant's age in terms of other permissible and relevant individual factors such as the absence or presence of a prior record.'"

  2. People v. Randolph

    242 Mich. App. 417 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 4 times

    The trial court properly considered defendant's age in terms of other permissible and relevant factors, such as defendant's extensive criminal record and admitted drug abuse, in sentencing defendant to a reasonable term of years. See People v Fleming, 428 Mich. 408, 423-424, n 17; 410 N.W.2d 266 (1987); People v McKernan, 185 Mich. App. 780, 781-782; 462 N.W.2d 843 (1990). We further note for purposes of remand that defendant's presentence report should reflect the agreement of the parties at the sentencing hearing that defendant's criminal record includes two, rather than four, misdemeanor convictions.

  3. People v. Piotrowski

    211 Mich. App. 527 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 29 times
    Holding that "by failing to refer this Court to any authority supporting her position, [the defendant] has effectively abandoned the issue."

    To this end, defendant emphasizes her youth at the time the crime was committed, her lack of a prior record, and the fact that the crime was inartfully perpetrated. With respect to defendant's contention concerning her age, while a sentencing court may, in some circumstances, consider a defendant's age, People v McKernan, 185 Mich. App. 780, 782; 462 N.W.2d 843 (1990), quoting People v Fleming, 428 Mich. 408, 423-424, n 17; 410 N.W.2d 266 (1987), it need not do so. With respect to her contention that the court failed to consider her lack of a criminal record, we have previously held that such failure does not constitute an unusual circumstance sufficient to overcome the presumption of proportionality.

  4. People v. Kerwin

    159 Ill. 2d 436 (Ill. 1994)   Cited 6 times
    In People v. Kerwin (1994), 159 Ill.2d 436, 445, 639 N.E.2d 539, our supreme court found defense counsel's performance "questionable.

    Before a sentencing judge can make such a conclusion, some scientific or psychological justification should be made part of the record and the defendant must be afforded the opportunity to challenge the court's belief * * *." People v. McKernan (1990), 185 Mich. App. 780, 782-83, 462 N.W.2d 843, 844. In the instant case, the trial judge apparently was influenced by his personal view of a highly complex aspect of human psychology.