|
No. 120256
| The
People of the State of Michigan |
|
Jason
W. Williams (313) 833-4559 |
|
Plaintiff-Appellee,
|
|
|
| vs (Appeal
from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
|
(Wayne
-- Townsend, L.)
|
|
|
| Ntuku Aliakbar, |
|
Chari K. Grove (313) 256-9833 |
|
Defendant-Appellant.
|
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiff-Appellee's Brief on Appeal>>
Defendant-Appellant's Brief on Appeal>>
Background
The defendant, Ntuku Aliakbar, was convicted of arson of a building.
His brother testified that, in September 1999, Aliakbar threw a lit
bottle at his family's home, which set fire to the house before Aliakbar's
brother put out the flames with a fire extinguisher. Before sentencing,
Aliakbar's mother testified that he had repeatedly vandalized family
vehicles and had made one prior arson attempt. She stated that the family
was "in fear of our lives" and that they slept in shifts,
keeping watch in case Aliakbar came to the house. In sentencing Aliakbar,
Wayne County Circuit Judge Leonard Tonwsend cited "the exposure
to danger that these people have been put through, and the fact that
they're living in fear of this matter continuing." The judge went
on to say that he rejected the sentencing guidelines because the guidelines
do "not truly reflect the gravity of this offense." He sentenced
Aliakbar to 7 ½ to 20 years in prison. The sentencing guidlines
for arson of a building call for 15 to 25 months. The Court of Appeals
affirmed Aliakbar's sentence in an unpublished memorandum opinion. In
so doing, the panel noted that the sentencing guidelines permit a judge
to depart from the guidelines if there is a "substantial and compelling
reason" to do so. "Where defendant engaged in a continuing
pattern of criminal activity ... there was a substantial and compelling
reason for departing from the fifteen to twenty-five month guideline
range," the Court of Appeals stated. On appeal, Aliakbar argues
in part that the sentence was not justified because the guidelines,
which assessed points for possession of an incendiary device and additional
points for a pending case, adequately reflect the seriousness of Aliakbar's
offense. Aliakbar also argues that the departure was unjustified because
no one was injured by his actions.
|
