Sentencing; Right to allocution; MCR 6.425(D)(1)(c); People v Dixon-Bey; Remand for resentencing before a different judge

Holding that the trial court denied defendant-West his right to allocution during sentencing, the court vacated his sentence and remanded for resentencing before a different judge. He pled guilty to possession with intent to deliver (PWID) 50 to 449 grams of cocaine; possession of less than 25 grams of oxycodone; resisting or obstructing a police officer; and possession of psilocybin. He was sentenced as a third-offense habitual offender to 12 to 40 years for PWID cocaine, 4 to 8 years for oxycodone possession, 2 to 4 years for each count of resisting or obstructing, and 5 days for psilocybin possession. The court concluded that the trial court judge “denied West a meaningful opportunity to speak during allocution.” Rather than waiting until he “was finished with his allocution to voice her thoughts, [she] continually interrupted, interrogated, and lectured him, denying him a meaningful opportunity to speak.” The court found that, considering how often she interrupted him “and the argumentative nature of her comments, . . . her conduct amounted to plain error that affected West’s substantial rights and that remand for resentencing” was required. In addition, it agreed with him that “remand for resentencing before a different judge is appropriate despite any inefficiency that may attend doing so.”