Sentencing; The sentencing court’s authority to modify a sentence; MCR 6.429(A); People v. Whalen; People v. Mitchell

The court held that the trial court erred by amending defendant’s original sentence. He was convicted of two counts of delivery of a controlled substance. The trial court initially sentenced him to 24 months to 20 years, then amended the judgment of sentence to reflect that he was to serve 72 months to 20 years. On appeal, the court agreed with defendant that the trial court erred by amending a valid sentence. “Defendant’s original sentence . . . was not invalid.” Indeed, it was “below the minimum sentencing guidelines range, but that alone does not render it invalid.” It noted that the register of actions indicated that “the original judgment of sentence was entered on June 26, 2018, following the first sentencing hearing, and an order of commitment was entered on that same date.” The order of commitment reflected his sentence of 24 months to 20 years. “The trial court lacked authority to amend a valid sentence after that date.” Thus, it “exceeded its authority by amending defendant’s sentence on its own initiative.” Defendant’s sentence of 72 months to 20 years “cannot stand.” Reversed, and remanded for the limited purpose of correcting defendant’s judgment of sentence to accurately reflect his sentence of 24 months to 20 years.