|
No. 134244
| People of the State of Michigan, |
|
Joshua D. Abbott |
Plaintiff-Appellee, |
|
|
| v |
(Appeal from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
(Macomb - Switalski, M.) |
|
|
| Andrew Paul Osantowski, |
|
Marla R. McCowan |
| Defendant-Appellant. |
|
|
| __________________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiff-Appellee's Brief in Opposition to Application for Leave to Appeal>>
Plaintiff-Appellee's Supplemental Brief>>
Defendant-Appellant's Application for Leave to Appeal>>
Defendant-Appellant's Supplemental Brief>>
Background
In a series of instant messages to an out-of-state girl, Andrew Paul Osantowski made a number of statements indicating he was planning a violent rampage at his Detroit-area high school. The girl’s father, a police officer, forwarded print copies of the messages to Michigan authorities. The Clinton Township police executed a search warrant at the Osantowski’s parents’ home, and found the weapons that Osantowski referred to in the instant messages, including an AK-47, 14 40-round magazines of ammunition, two shotguns, and over 1,000 rounds of shotgun ammunition, along with propane containers, ammonium nitrate, cans of “sterno,” six knives, and pipes in various stages of assembly for pipe bombs. Osantowski was convicted by a jury of making a false report or threat of terrorism, using a computer to commit a crime, and felony firearm. He was sentenced to two and a half to 20 years in prison on the predicate charges, consecutive to a mandatory two-year prison sentence for the felony firearm conviction. Osantowski appealed by right, and the prosecution cross-appealed the sentence, arguing that the trial court erred by failing to assess 100 points for Offense Variable 20 of the statutory guidelines. MCL 777.49a, requires 100 points to be assessed under OV 20 if the “offender committed an act of terrorism by using or threatening to use . . . [an] incendiary device, or explosive device.” In a published opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed Osantowski’s convictions but remanded the case to the trial court for resentencing. For purposes of scoring OV 20, an “act of terrorism” includes not only overt acts, but also threats to engage in the prohibited acts, the Court of Appeals held. Osantowski appeals.
Top of Page
|
