Court Opinion

ID: 9667513
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 01:47:46.514673+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:38.544262
License: Public Domain

T. M. Burns, J.
(dissenting in part and concurring in part). I agree that defendant’s conviction of assaulting a prison employee contrary to MCL 750.197c; MSA 28.394(3) should be affirmed. However, I agree with defendant that error occurred when a sentencing conference was held in the chambers of the judge without him. See People v McIntosh, 101 Mich App 422, 423; 300 NW2d 584 (1980) (T. M. Burns, J., dissenting).
The right of a defendant to allocute at sentencing is protected by GCR 1963, 785.8(2). However, this right means nothing unless a defendant can respond with particularity to all factors taken into account by the judge when determining an appropriate sentence. Where a defendant is denied the opportunity to be present at a sentencing conference such as the instant one, that defendant cannot be expected to be aware of all considerations that went into the determination of his sentence, nor can he be expected to adequately refute any *792inaccurate information that may have arisen during the in-chambers conference.
The better procedure to follow when a defendant’s attorney wishes to speak privately with a sentencing judge is to have the defendant waive on the record his right to be present at the sentencing discussion prior to the time that it is held. Because no such waiver was made in this case, and because the record does not reflect that defendant was ever apprised of what was said at the in-chambers conference, I believe that we must remand for resentencing.