Motion for relief from judgment; Sentencing; Violent habitual offender; Waiver

The court held that a review of the merits of defendant’s argument was unnecessary because he “waived the issue of whether he was timely notified of his violent offender status that resulted in his 25-year mandatory minimum sentence.” Thus, the court affirmed the trial court’s order denying his motion for relief from judgment. Defendant “did not object to the enhancement at the trial court level, nor did he request additional time to consider his options.” But before the trial court accepted his plea offer, an exchange occurred that showed repeated acknowledgments by him that “he was required to be sentenced as a violent habitual offender and that the 25-year mandatory minimum sentence applied to him. Indeed, defendant affirmatively acknowledged his status as a violent habitual offender multiple times; he additionally stated that he understood this meant he was subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years’ imprisonment if he was convicted of second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter.” Thus, he waived any challenge to his status as a violent habitual offender.