|
No. 122696
| People of the State of Michigan, |
|
John H. Pallas
(248) 858-0656 |
|
Plaintiff-Appellant, |
|
|
| vs
(Appeal from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
|
(Oakland - Langford-Morris, D.) |
|
|
| Deon Lamont Claypool, |
|
Mark S. Bosler (248) 647-8180 |
|
Defendant-Appellee. |
|
|
| _____________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiff-Appellant's Brief on Appeal>>
Defendant-Appellee's Brief on Appeal>>
Background
Deon Lamont Claypool sold cocaine to undercover officers three times over a period of nine days. The first two sales involved less than 50 grams of cocaine; the third and last sale was for four and a half ounces, over 50 grams. Claypool pled guilty to a number of criminal charges, including one count of delivery of 50 to 224 grams of cocaine. MCL 333.7401(2)(a)(iii) provides that a person convicted of this offense “is guilty of a felony and shall be imprisoned for not less than 10 years nor more than 20 years.” The statute also states that “The court may depart from the minimum term of imprisonment … if the court finds on the record that there are substantial and compelling reasons to do so.” Claypool’s attorney argued that there were substantial and compelling reasons for departing from the 10-year minimum. Claypool’s counsel pointed out that Claypool was 26 years old at the time of the offense, had been employed as a cab driver since 1998, and had only one minor criminal offense on his record. The attorney also argued that the undercover officer kept coming back to defendant, and paid him $500 over and above the cost of the drugs as an inducement. Therefore, defense counsel argued, the police induced Claypool to sell more cocaine to increase his prison sentence. The prosecutor responded that the officers were trying to build Claypool’s trust by buying increasing quantities of cocaine, and that their investigation was aimed at finding out how important a drug dealer Claypool was. In sentencing Claypool to 8 to 20 years, the judge noted Claypool’s age, record, and employment history, adding “it is unfortunate that you weren’t arrested and charged originally because perhaps you would have been able to receive some treatment.” The judge also commented that Claypool’s offense was “escalated” by the series of drug buys. The prosecutor appealed the sentence; the Court of Appeals affirmed in an unpublished opinion. The prosecutor appeals, arguing that the trial judge’s decision was not supported by “substantial and compelling reasons.”
Top of Page
|
