PEOPLE OF MI V ALICE GRIGAR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
May 9, 1997
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
ALICE GRIGAR,
No. 191958
Genesee Circuit Court
LC No. 95-052651-FH
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: D.F. Walsh,* P.J., and R.P. Griffin** and W.P. Cynar,* JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Defendant pleaded guilty to embezzlement, MCL 750.175; MSA 28.372, and was sentenced
to three to ten years’ imprisonment. She appeals as of right. We remand. This case has been decided
without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E)(1)(b).
Defendant argues that the court failed to articulate reasons for departing from the sentencing
guidelines. We agree. When a trial court exceeds the guidelines’ range, it must articulate both on the
record and on the SIR factors not included within the guidelines’ range or factors not accounted for
adequately by the guidelines. People v Barclay, 208 Mich App 670, 677; 528 NW2d 842 (1995). In
the present case, the court departed from the guidelines’ range of one to two years and simply stated on
the record and the SIR that the guidelines were not severe enough. This is not sufficient to comply with
the articulation requirement. Accordingly, remand is necessary in order for the court to articulate its
reasons for departure. People v Miles, 156 Mich App 431, 436-437; 402 NW2d 34 (1986); People
v Adams, 195 Mich App 267, 281; 489 NW2d 192 (1992), modified 441 Mich 916; 497 NW2d
182 (1993). As a result of our disposition of this issue, we decline to address defendant’s remaining
issue that her sentence is disproportionate. However, we shall retain jurisdiction to review that
challenge after the trial court has had the opportunity to articulate specific reasons for departing from the
sentencing guidelines.
*Former Court of Appeals judges, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment pursuant to
Administrative Order 1996-10.
**Former Supreme Court justice, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment pursuant to
Administrative Order 1996-10.
Remanded for articulation of the reasons for defendant’s sentence. Jurisdiction is retained.
/s/ Daniel F. Walsh
/s/ Robert P. Griffin
/s/ Walter P. Cynar
-2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
