e-Journal Summary

e-Journal Number : 73016
Opinion Date : 05/07/2020
e-Journal Date : 05/27/2020
Court : Michigan Court of Appeals
Case Name : People v. Appling
Practice Area(s) : Criminal Law
Judge(s) : Per Curiam - Cavanagh, Sawyer, and Riordan
Full PDF Opinion
Issues:

Motion to withdraw a guilty plea; MCR 6.310(A)-E); People v. Al-Shara; People v. Brown; Whether a plea was voluntary & knowing; People v. Fonville; Registration requirements under the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA) (MCL 28.721 et seq.); MCL 28.723(1)(a); “Listed offense”; MCL 28.722(j); Principle that CSC I is a tier III offense; MCL 28.722(w)(iv); Principle that an individual convicted of a tier III offense is required to register under SORA for his or her lifetime; MCL 28.725(12)

Summary

The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding defendant was not entitled to withdraw his plea on the basis that it was not voluntarily and knowingly made, because it did not err by finding he was aware of the required lifetime registration under SORA at the time he entered his plea. He was convicted of CSC I and sentenced to 8 to 12 years. On appeal, the court rejected his argument that the trial court abused its discretion by denying his motion to withdraw his plea. He claimed the trial court should have granted his motion because he was not advised of the requirement that he register under the SORA. “[T]his case is distinguishable from Fonville because the Fonville Court concluded that the defendant was prejudiced as a result of his counsel’s failure to inform the defendant of the SORA registration requirement.” In this case, “defendant does not argue that his counsel was ineffective for failing to inform him of the SORA registration requirement.” Further, although he “argues that the trial court erred by failing to inform him of the lifetime SORA registration requirement, the record indicates that [he] was aware that a conviction of CSC I required lifetime SORA registration.” Affirmed.

Full PDF Opinion