Court Opinion

ID: 9703266
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 23:48:15.422587+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:46.980981
License: Public Domain

Beasley, J.
(dissenting). I respectfully dissent.
The sentencing was as follows:
"MR. HOEKSTRA [Prosecuting Attorney]: May it please the Court, this is criminal case number 22775, the People of the State of Michigan v Thomas David Corlin. Mr. Corlin is here represented by his attorney, Wade Seys, and is here for purposes of sentencing on the charge of delivery of a controlled substance.
"There may be some confusion here, your Honor; I’ve been informed that the pre-sentence indicates that the charge was possession — yes, and this is a case that I, myself, handled, and I think Mr. Seys would agree that the plea, or the agreement at least, was to plead to a delivery charge.
"MR. SEYS [Defense counsel]: That’s correct.
"THE COURT: Mr. Seys?
"MR. SEYS: I have read the pre-sentence report, your Honor, and I find it complete except for that one exception, and I have no further comment.
"THE COURT: Mr. Corlin, do you have anything to say before sentence is imposed?
"THE DEFENDANT: No.
"THE COURT: It is the sentence or judgment of this Court that you be remanded to the custody of the Kent County Jail for a period of 12 months, with two days credit for time previously served, that sentence to commence October 13, 1978.
"This is a final sentence or judgment of this Court and you can appeal to the Court of Appeals as a matter of right within the next 60 days, and the Clerk is now handing you a form showing you how to take or perfect that appeal, and if you cannot afford an attorney to do it, the People will provide one for you at no cost or expense to yourself.” (Emphasis added.)
I would hold that the trial court imposed a valid *745sentence upon defendant. Both attorneys called the judge’s attention to the fact that he was sentencing for delivery of a controlled substance, after which he described his sentence as a ñnal sentence, subject to appeal. It was only after sentence that the trial court had second thoughts.
Unlike People v Johnson,1 this sentence is not based upon an offense to which defendant had not pled guilty. Rather, I would find this case controlled by People v Robert Jackson2 and People v Fox.3
I would vote to set aside the sentence subsequently imposed and to reinstate the initial sentence of 12 months in the county jail.

 60 Mich App 371; 230 NW2d 438 (1975).

 63 Mich App 249, 255; 234 NW2d 471 (1975).

 312 Mich 577; 20 NW2d 732 (1945).