PEOPLE OF MI V JOHN DENNIS MILLER
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
February 15, 2000
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 213740
Jackson Circuit Court
LC No. 96-074756-FH
JOHN DENNIS MILLER,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: O’Connell, P.J., and Meter and T. G. Hicks*, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Defendant appeals as of right from his sentence for probation violation following his plea-based
conviction of breaking and entering a building with the intent to commit larceny, MCL 750.110; MSA
28.305. We affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
Defendant pleaded guilty to breaking and entering a building with the intent to commit larceny
and to receiving or concealing stolen property having a value in excess of $100, MCL 750.535; MSA
28.803. At sentencing, the trial court vacated the receiving or concealing conviction. The trial court
sentenced defendant to three years’ probation, with the first 180 days in jail. Defendant received credit
for 104 days. In addition, defendant was ordered to pay costs, a fine, and restitution.
Defendant was charged with violating his probation on four occasions. On the first three
occasions, his probation was continued. On the fourth occasion, the trial court found him guilty of failing
to report to his probation officer and sentenced him to five to ten years in prison, with credit for 458
days. In imposing sentence, the trial court noted that defendant had a lengthy prior record, that he had
failed to abide by the terms of his probation, and that his prospects for rehabilitation while on probation
were not good.
Defendant argues that his sentence is disproportionate. We disagree and affirm. The sentencing
guidelines do not apply to probation violators and are not to be considered when fashioning a sentence
for probation violation. People v Williams, 223 Mich App 409, 412-413;
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1
566 NW2d 649 (1997). The key test of the proportionality of a sentence is whether it reflects the
seriousness of the matter. People v Houston, 448 Mich 312, 320; 532 NW2d 508 (1995).
Defendant had a prior record consisting of eleven misdemeanor convictions. He repeatedly failed to
comply with the terms of his probation, in spite of the fact that he was given multiple opportunities to do
so. His actions indicated an unwillingness to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.
Defendant’s sentence does not constitute an abuse of discretion under these circumstances. See
People v Alexander, 234 Mich App 665, 679-680; 599 NW2d 749 (1999).
Affirmed.
/s/ Peter D. O’Connell
/s/ Patrick M. Meter
/s/ Timothy G. Hicks
-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.