PEOPLE OF MI V JOHN RICHARDS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
February 26, 2009
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 283608
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 07-014179-01-FH
JOHN RICHARDS, a/k/a JOHN CLANCE
HATCHETT,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Donofrio, P.J., and K. F. Kelly and Beckering, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Defendant appeals as of right the sentence imposed on his bench trial conviction of
breaking and entering without permission, MCL 750.115. His appeal centers on the application
of jail credit toward the sentence for which the parole was granted rather than the instant
conviction. We affirm defendant’s conviction and sentence, but remand for correction of
defendant’s Judgment of Sentence.1
Defendant’s sole argument on appeal is that he should have received an unspecified
amount of jail credit for the time he spent in jail prior to sentencing on the instant offense.
Defendant, who was on parole for a prior offense at the time he committed the instant offense,
acknowledges that, pursuant to People v Watts, 186 Mich App 686, 689; 464 NW2d 715 (1991),
and People v Seiders, 262 Mich App 702, 705; 686 NW2d 821 (2004), he is not entitled to credit
1
Defendant’s judgment of sentence contains a discrepancy. Defendant was charged with
entering without breaking, MCL 750.111. The trial court’s comments during trial first suggest
that the trial court believed the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence of intent to steal
during the entry. However, the trial court then found defendant guilty of “entering without the
owner’s permission” in the instant case. The judgment of sentence lists MCL 750.111 as the
conviction offense. However, it also contains a description of the offense as “breaking and
entering without intent,” which would seem to coincide with the crime of breaking and entering
without permission, MCL 750.115. On appeal, the parties agree that defendant was convicted of
the lesser included offense of entering the building without the owner’s permission. We remand
this case to the trial court for correction of defendant’s judgment of sentence to accurately reflect
his conviction for the lesser offense.
-1-
against the subsequent offense. Any jail time is instead credited toward the sentence for which
the parole was granted. Seiders, supra at 705, citing MCL 791.238(2) and MCL 768.7a(2).
While defendant asks this Court to revisit this issue, this Court has repeatedly declined to do so.
See e.g., People v Filip, 278 Mich App 635, 640-642; 754 NW2d 660 (2008); People v Stewart,
203 Mich App 432, 433; 513 NW2d 147 (1994). Defendant has offered nothing new to cause
this Court to revisit this issue. Moreover, because defendant is no longer incarcerated, his claim
of error is moot.
Defendant’s conviction and sentence is affirmed. This case is remanded for correction of
the Judgment of Sentence. We do not retain jurisdiction.
/s/ Pat M. Donofrio
/s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly
/s/ Jane E. Beckering
-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.
