Speedy trial; People v Williams; Denial of mistrial; People v Dickinson; Mandatory minimum sentencing; MCL 769.12; People v Benton

The court held that defendant was not denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial despite a three-year delay between arrest and trial. Defendant was convicted of armed robbery, AWIGBH, FIP, and felony-firearm arising from an armed convenience-store robbery and subsequent shootout with an off-duty police officer. The trial court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss based on speedy-trial grounds and later imposed mandatory minimum sentences under the habitual-offender statute. On appeal, the court held that although the delay was presumptively prejudicial, it did not violate defendant’s speedy-trial rights because “the vast majority of the delay was attributable to the [COVID-19] pandemic,” which is not chargeable to the prosecution, and defendant failed to show prejudice to his defense. The court also held that denial of a mistrial was proper after a police witness made an unsolicited reference to an MDOC photograph because the remark was isolated, unintentional, and cured by instruction, and “an unresponsive, volunteered answer to a proper question is not grounds for the granting of a mistrial.” The court further held that the mandatory 25-year minimum sentence imposed under MCL 769.12 did not constitute cruel or unusual punishment or violate separation of powers because the Legislature has authority to prescribe mandatory penalties, and such sentencing schemes have been upheld as constitutional. Affirmed.