Upon reviewing the case of People v. Smith 437 Mich. 293 (1991), we find that the defendant Ricky Smith; an adult at the time of the commission of the offenses in question, was a habitual juvenile offender; possessing a juvenile record which included twelve juvenile entries including seven prior felonies, three misdemeanors, was charged, pleaded guilty, and convicted of breaking and entering with the intent to commit larceny and being a habitual offender. As a result of the admission of guilt by Smith, he was sentenced to 3 ½ to 10 years, however, the sentence was vacated after it was determined that Smith was a habitual offender, where the current offense constituted his 4th offense. (Justlaw) Therefore, as a result of the juvenile offenses being taken into consideration for sentencing, Smith received a sentence of 6 to 30 years as a habitual offender. Smith’s argument comes from the admission of his juvenile criminal record which was referenced in the presentencing investigative report, citing that pursuant to former MCR 5.913 which indicates that “the juvenile record of a former offender was expunged at the age of twenty-seven”,(justlaw) and as such, should …show more content…
In reviewing People v Price, 172 Mich App386, 300-400; 431 NW2d829 (1988), the court found that the panel ruled that the juvenile record was automatically expunged and therefore could not be considered for the purpose of sentencing (justlaw). Conversely, the court found in People v Jones, 173 Mich App 341, 343; 433 NW2d 829 (1988), a second panel concluded that the expunged criminal history of juveniles was admissible in the presentence report as well as the consideration during