Opinion ID: 848704
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: MCR 6.005 Requirements Were Satisfied

Text: Contrary to the dissent, we believe the trial court followed the letter, and not just the spirit, of MCR 6.005(D). The trial court advised defendant of the charge, the maximum possible prison sentence for the offense, [and] any mandatory minimum sentence required by law: The Court: And let me first inform you, then, and I have to do this on the record, what the max  the minimum and maximum sentences are, so that if you are found guilty, you know what's ahead of you. For the homicide felony murder, the maximum is life. For the armed robbery, the sentence is life or any term of years, unless aggravated assault or serious injury is involved, and then it's not less than two years. And for the felony firearm, that's two years, which would be ... in addition to, and preceding, before, any term of imprisonment imposed for the felony or attempted felony conviction. Do you understand all that? The Defendant: Yes, ma'am.    The Court: Mr. Williams, I want you to fully understand that if you are found guilty of homicide felony murder which alleges that you did, while in the perpetration attempted perpetration of a robbery, murder one Jerry Jones, that is a mandatory life sentence. Life is the minimum and life is the maximum. Do you understand that? The Defendant: Yes, ma'am. The court further explicitly complied with MCR 6.005(D)(1) by advising defendant of the risk involved in self-representation: The Court: Now, sir, as I mentioned before, there are great risks that you are taking on in representing yourself. Do you understand that? The Defendant: Well, your Honor. I know ya' all could possibly get me another attorney, but it would be another court-appointed attorney. The Court: No, that's not an option. We're in the middle of trial. The Defendant: Well, good. The trial court complied with the requirement of MCR 6.005(D)(2) by providing defendant his court-appointed attorney as an advisor: The Court: He's going to be here during the trial so that you can ask him any questions and he can give you any counsel that you might need. The Defendant: Thank you, your Honor. The record reflects that the trial court conscientiously complied with every requirement of MCR 6.005(D), exceeding the substantial compliance required under Adkins, supra at 706, 551 N.W.2d 108. We do not agree with the dissent that 6.005(D) requires that a court indicate whether it believe[s] defendant's request [is] contingent on other factors. Post at 13. The trial court satisfied all of the waiver-of-counsel procedure required under MCR 6.005(D) and did not err in granting defendant's request to waive counsel and allowing defendant to proceed in propria persona.