PEOPLE OF MI V TAMIKA SHUNTELL WILLIAMS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
March 11, 2010
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 289956
Macomb Circuit Court
LC No. 2007-000128-FC
TAMIKA SHUNTELL WILLIAMS,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Servitto, P.J., and Bandstra and Fort Hood, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant was convicted in 2007 of two counts of torture, MCL 750.85, and two counts
of first-degree child abuse, MCL 750.136b(2). At sentencing, the court ordered defendant to
reimburse the county for attorney fees and investigator fees. In a prior appeal, this Court
affirmed defendant’s convictions, but remanded for a determination of defendant’s ability to pay
the fees in accordance with People v Dunbar, 264 Mich App 240; 690 NW2d 476 (2004).1 See
People v Williams, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued November
18, 2008 (Docket No. 279631), lv den 483 Mich 911 (2009), slip op at pp 4-5. On remand, the
trial court determined that defendant had the ability to pay. Defendant now appeals that ruling as
of right. Because subsequent events make it impossible to grant relief, we dismiss this appeal as
moot. This appeal has been decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The record discloses that Judge Mary Chrzanowski, who presided over defendant’s trial
and imposed sentence, conducted a hearing on remand and determined that defendant had the
ability to pay fees. The court’s ruling was memorialized in a December 17, 2008, hearing
disposition form. Defendant thereafter successfully petitioned Judge Chrzanowski’s successor,
Judge Edward Servitto, to vacate Judge Chrzanowski’s decision, thereby returning the case to a
pre-remand posture, and requiring Judge Servitto to make the determination regarding
defendant’s ability to pay in accordance with this Court’s remand order. Defendant filed a
motion asking the trial court to consider that issue and to find that she lacked the ability to pay.
1
Dunbar was subsequently overruled by People v Jackson, 483 Mich 271; 769 NW2d 630
(2009).
-1-
Following a hearing, Judge Servitto issued an order “denying motion to rescind requirement to
pay attorney and investigation fees.”
Because a trial court is presumed to know and follow the law unless the contrary is
clearly shown, People v Alexander, 234 Mich App 665, 675; 599 NW2d 749 (1999); People v
Farmer, 30 Mich App 707, 711; 186 NW2d 779 (1971), and because Judge Servitto vacated
Judge Chrzanowski’s earlier decision and then issued an order expressly denying defendant’s
request to vacate the reimbursement obligation, it must be presumed that Judge Servitto was
aware that he was to make an independent determination regarding defendant’s ability to pay and
did so. Defendant does not challenge Judge Servitto’s ruling, but instead only challenges Judge
Chrzanowski’s vacated ruling. Because Judge Chrzanowski’s decision has been vacated, and
defendant does not challenge Judge Servitto’s decision, there is nothing for this Court to review.
Accordingly, we dismiss defendant’s appeal as moot. B P 7 v Bureau of State Lottery, 231 Mich
App 356, 359; 586 NW2d 117 (1998).
Dismissed as moot.
/s/ Deborah A. Servitto
/s/ Richard A. Bandstra
/s/ Karen M. Fort Hood
-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.
