People v. Mutchie

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that it was unnecessary to determine if a scoring error in OV 11 existed and required resentencing when the sentences imposed were departures “above the recommended range in any event, and the court expressly stated” the reasons for the departure
• affirming the defendant’s sentence despite the trial court’s incorrect assessment of OV 11 because the trial court “clearly expressed its view that the sentences imposed in this case were the proper sentences without regard to how OV 11 might be scored.”
• where the Supreme Court declined to review the scoring of OV 11 when “the circuit court clearly expressed its view that the [departure] sentences imposed in this case were the proper sentences without regard to how OV 11 might be scored”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).