Court Opinion

ID: 9685760
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 15:01:04.032008+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:09.984326
License: Public Domain

Shepherd, J.
(concurring). At the time of the plea it was made clear on the record at least twice that if defendant did not make full restitution by the time of sentencing the plea agreement would be null and void. Defendant did not make restitution and had defendant moved to vacate the plea I believe the trial judge would have been obligated to grant the motion and set all cases against defendant for trial. The prosecutor also would *299have been free to prosecute those future cases in which the defendant might have been involved. The defendant chose not to move to vacate the plea undoubtedly because he did not believe it to be in his interest to go to trial on all outstanding and future charges. Instead defendant chose to ratify the plea but now wants to take advantage of a portion of the plea agreement which he claims to be invalid.
Defendant is correct when he says that restitution can only be ordered as part of a sentence of probation and the court may not require a probationer to pay restitution unless the probationer is or will be able to make payment during the term of probation. MCL 771.3(5), (6); MSA 28.1133(5), (6). People v Blaney, 139 Mich App 694; 363 NW2d 13 (1984). However this is not a case where restitution was ordered as part of a sentence. This was a plea bargain where the defendant freely undertook to make restitution as part of the agreement.
Since defendant continues to maintain in the brief filed in this case on appeal that he does not wish to have the plea of guilty vacated, I agree with the majority that at the sentencing he was subject to the maximum penalty allowed by law.