Source: https://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/1980s/op06131.htm
Timestamp: 2020-04-03 02:21:17
Document Index: 628876944

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 5', 'art 5', 'art 5', 'art 4', 'art 4', 'art 4', 'art 5', 'art 4', 'art 5', 'art 5']

Opinion #6131
Opinion No. 6131
Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 14--power of Governor to commute sentences of prisoners
Reduction of fixed terms of prisoners sentenced to county jails
Authority to reduce fixed terms of prisoners sentenced to the county jail.
1982 PA 325, Secs. 6 and 7, which authorize a county sheriff to reduce the fixed sentences of prisoners committed or imprisoned in the county jail, are unconstitutional because they are violative of Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 14.
Mr. Peter C. Jensen
BORRELLO, THOMAS & JENSEN, P.C.
Saginaw County Corporate Counsel
As corporate counsel for the County of Saginaw, you have requested my opinion whether 1982 PA 325, Secs. 6 and 7, are constitutional.
1982 PA 325; MCLA 801.51 et seq; MSA 28.1748(1) et seq, as its title states, is an act to authorize county sheriffs to declare a county jail overcrowding state of emergency, to prescribe the powers and duties of certain judges, county sheriffs and other county officials, and to provide remedies for a county overcrowding state of emergency. 1982 PA 325, supra, became effective on February 8, 1983.
If the general prisoner population of a county jail exceeds 100 percent of its rated design capacity or a percentage of rated design capacity less than 100 percent as set by a court order prior to the effective date of the Act for a period of seven consecutive days or for a lesser number of days as set by a court, the county sheriff is required to certify the fact to the chief circuit judge, the chief district judge, and each municipal court judge in the county where the county jail is located, the chairperson of the county board of commissioners and the county executive in a county in which a county executive is elected. 1982 PA 325, supra, Sec. 2.
In the event a majority of these officials do not find the sheriff to have acted in error, within three business days of such certification, the sheriff shall declare a county jail overcrowding state of emergency as provided for in 1982 PA 325, supra, Sec. 3, and notice of the declaration is to be provided to the aforesaid officials, as well as the county prosecuting attorney and the law enforcement official of each state, county, and municipal law enforcement agency, as set forth in 1982 PA 325, supra, Sec. 4. As provided in section 5 of 1982 PA 325, supra, the persons notified pursuant to section 4 and the specified judges may attempt to reduce the prisoner population of the county jail through any available means which are already within the scope of their individual and collective legal authority, including, but not limited to, a series of alternatives set forth in various subsections of section 5.
1982 PA 325, supra, Sec. 6, provides:
'(1) If the actions taken pursuant to section 5 do not reduce the county jail's population to 90% of rated design capacity or a percentage of rated design capacity less than 90% as set by a court prior to the effective date of this act within 14 days of the declaration of the county jail overcrowding state of emergency, the sheriff shall present to the chief circuit judge for the county in which the jail is located the following information for each prisoner sentenced to and housed in the county jail on that date:
'(a) The name of each prisoner.
'(b) The offense for which the prisoner was convicted.
'(c) The length of sentence imposed for the prisoner.
'(d) The date on which the prisoner began serving his or her sentence.
'(e) The date on which the prisoner will be released from the jail according to the terms of his or her sentence, including computations for good time.
'(f) The name of the judge who imposed the sentence.
'(2) After the chief circuit judge for the county in which the jail is located reviews the information presented by the sheriff pursuant to subsection (1), the chief circuit judge shall, for purposes of county jail population reduction, classify the prisoners into 2 groups; those prisoners who, if released, would present a high risk to the public safety, and those who, if released, would not present a high risk to the public safety. The chief circuit judge shall also determine a minimum and a maximum percentage by which the sentences can be reduced. The sheriff shall reduce the sentences of all prisoners who, if released, would not present a high risk to the public safety by an equal percentage which is within the minimum and maximum percentages determined by the chief circuit judge.
'(3) The sentences of prisoners sentenced to and housed in the county jail after the fourteenth day of the county jail overcrowding state of emergency may continue to be reduced in the same manner as prescribed in subsections (1) and (2), but shall not be reduced after the county jail overcrowding state of emergency is ended or after the sheriff orders a sentence reduction pursuant to section 7, whichever occurs first.'
In 1982 PA 325, supra, Sec. 7, the Legislature has provided:
'If the actions taken pursuant to sections 5 and 6 do not reduce the county jail's population to 90% of rated design capacity or a percentage of rated design capacity less than 90% as set by a court prior to the effective date of this act within 28 days of the declaration of the county jail overcrowding state of emergency, the original sentences, not including good time, of all prisoners sentenced to and housed in the county jail on that date shall be equally reduced by the sheriff by the least possible percentage reduction necessary, not to exceed 30%, to reduce the county jail's prisoner population to 90% of the rated design capacity.'
1982 PA 325, Secs. 6 and 7, supra, are modelled after 1980 PA 519, Secs. 6 and 7; MLCA 800.76; MSA 28.1437(6); MCLA 800.77; MSA 28.1437(7), which authorized reduction in the minimum sentences of prisoners in state prisons by the Director of the Department of Corrections upon declaration of the Corrections Commission of a prison overcrowding state of emergency not found to be erroneous by the Governor. These provisions were challenged in Oakland County Prosecuting Attorney v Department of Corrections, 411 Mich 183, 195; 305 NW2d 515, 520 (1981), as violative of the constitutional authority of the Governor to commute sentences conferred by Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 14, which provides:
'The governor shall have power to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons after convictions for all offenses, except cases of impeachment, upon such conditions and limitations as he may direct, subject to procedures and regulations prescribed by law. He shall inform the legislature annually of each reprieve, commutation and pardon granted, stating reasons therefor.'
Relying upon Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 45, which empowers the Legislature to 'provide for indeterminate sentences as punishment for crime and for the detention and release of persons imprisoned or detained under such sentences[,]' the Michigan Supreme Court held that the power of the Governor to commute sentences is not abridged by 1980 PA 519, Secs. 6 and 7, supra, because Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 45 expressly authorizes the Legislature to "provide for release of persons imprisoned or detained under [indeterminate] sentences". Thus, the power to enact statutes providing for release of prisoners detained under indeterminate sentences was held to derive from a wholly separate constitutional grant of power found in Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 45 and the statute was constitutional.
It must be emphasized that indeterminate sentencing applies to persons convicted of a felony, the punishment for which is prescribed by law 'may be imprisonment in a state prison' only, 1927 PA 175, c 9, Sec. 8, as amended; MCLA 769.8; MSA 28.1080; 1927 PA 175, c 9, Sec. 10; MLCA 769.10; MSA 28.1082, but it should not apply to a person convicted for the commission of an offense for which the only punishment prescribed by law is imprisonment for life, 1927 PA 175, c 9, Sec. 9; MCLA 769.9; MSA 28.1081. Such persons are imprisoned in state prisons, except that some of them may be housed in county jails pursuant to contracts entered into between the Department of Corrections and the county. See, 1981 PA 48, Sec. 7(2); 1982 PA 262, Secs. 1 and 13. However, the prisoner remains under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections, and in event of overcrowding of a particular county jail, the contract contains an express clause which provides for its termination for any reason upon 30 days notice and as a matter of practice, the Department will remove its prisoners from a county jail upon 48 hours notice.
Persons committed for contempt of court or convicted of a crime and sentenced for a maximum of one year or less shall be sent to the county jail or to the Detroit House of Correction, and not to a state prison. 1927 PA 175, c 9, Sec. 28; MCLA 769.28; MSA 28.1097(1). Persons sentenced to a county jail for one year for a misdemeanor do not receive an indeterminate sentence. People v Leonard, 51 Mich App 368; 214 NW2d 888, lv den 391 Mich 827 (1974). A one-year jail sentence to the county jail for a felony is not an indeterminate sentence. People v Lyles, 76 Mich App 688; 257 NW2d 220 (1977).
A conviction punishable by a sentence of more than one year, even though listed as a misdemeanor under statutory provisions outside of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1927 PA 175; MCLA 761.1 et seq; MSA 28.843 et seq, is treated as a conviction for a felony for the purpose of indeterminate sentencing.
Persons convicted of a felony may be placed upon probation and one of the conditions which may be imposed is imprisonment in the county jail for not more than twelve months, as provided in 1927 PA 175, c 11, Sec. 3; MCLA 771.3; MSA 28.1133. Such sentence, if imposed, is not an indeterminate sentence.
It must follow that persons sentenced by a court to a county jail and placed under the care and custody of a county sheriff are not serving indeterminate sentences.
The power reposed by the people in the Governor to grant commutations after conviction for all offenses, except cases of impeachment, Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 14, is limited only by the authority of the Legislature to provide for the release of persons imprisoned or detained under indeterminate sentences as punishment for crime as conferred by the people in Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 45. This gubernatorial prerogative has been 'jealously guarded' by the courts. Oakland County Prosecuting Attorney v Department of Corrections, supra, 411 Mich 183, 191; 305 NW2d 515, 518, citing People v Freleigh, 334 Mich 306; 54 NW2d 599 (1952), and People v Fox, 312 Mich 577; 20 NW2d 732; 168 ALR 703 (1945); People v Whalen, 412 Mich 166; 312 NW2d 638 (1981).
Oakland County Prosecuting Attorney v Department of Corrections, supra, is the controlling authority on the question of the power of the Legislature to authorize the release of prisoners imprisoned as punishment for crime and must be observed. The Legislature may provide only for the release of persons imprisoned as punishment for crime pursuant to indeterminate sentences.
1982 PA 325, Secs. 6 and 7, supra, empower a county sheriff to reduce the fixed sentences of persons committed to or imprisoned in the county jail in contravention of Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 14. Only the Governor has been empowered to commute such sentences.
It is my opinion, therefore, that 1982 PA 325, Secs. 6 and 7, supra, are unconstitutional because they are violative of Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 14.