Michigan
Michigan Court of Appeals orders another new sentence in Lenawee County sex abuse case
ADRIAN — A man convicted in 2018 by a Lenawee County Circuit Court jury of engaging in sex acts with the son and daughter of his on-again, off-again girlfriend and wife should have his minimum sentence reduced again, a Michigan Court of Appeals panel has ordered.
David Alan Stevens’ minimum sentence on a conviction for first-degree criminal sexual conduct should be set between six years and nine months and 11 years and three months, Judges Mark J. Cavanagh, Kathleen Jansen and Allie Greenleaf Maldonado said in their opinion. The change is due to a prior conviction in Ohio being incorrectly used as the basis for a habitual offender enhancement.
“The record does not provide a sufficient basis upon which to conclude that the conduct giving rise to defendant’s Ohio conviction would have been a felony in Michigan, and therefore, the trial court erred by sentencing defendant as a habitual offender,” the opinion states.
This will be the second time Stevens, 48, has been resentenced. The new sentence will be about one-third of the original minimum sentence in this case.
Stevens, 48, is currently serving 14 to 75 years in prison after being resentenced in 2022.
First-degree criminal sexual conduct is punishable by up to life in prison.
Stevens was convicted in 2018 after a trial in Lenawee County Circuit Court of one count of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and two counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct. Judge Anna Marie Anzalone sentenced him to 21 years and 10 months to 75 years in prison.
The first time he was resentenced, the Court of Appeals found Stevens’ attorney failed to object to faulty jury instructions provided by Anzalone and he failed to request an instruction that would limit how the jury was to consider testimony about other acts that was given during the trial. The Appeals Court vacated the two counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct and ordered he be resentenced because of how the vacated charges had factored into the scoring for the minimum sentence on the first-degree charge as well as an error in calculating the minimum sentence. Anzalone’s new sentence was 14 to 75 years in prison.
In the latest appeal, a different three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals — Judges Mark J. Cavanagh, Kathleen Jansen and Allie Greenleaf Maldonado — agreed with Stevens’ argument that he had been improperly sentenced as a habitual offender. Stevens had prior convictions in Ohio for possession of criminal tools and nonsupport of dependents. For a prior conviction in another state to be used as a habitual offender enhancement, the offense must have been something that would have been a felony or attempt to commit a felony in Michigan, the opinion said.
Anzalone had determined that the criminal tools conviction would not have been a felony in Michigan. The nonsupport charge is a fifth-degree felony in Ohio, but the appeals judges said how another state classifies its offenses doesn’t matter.
“Establishing that defendant was guilty of a fifth-degree felony in Ohio does nothing to establish that this would have been a felony in Michigan,” the opinion states.
In Michigan’s law regarding nonpayment of child support, the opinion says, someone has to violate a court order to make payments in order to be convicted of a felony.
“The critical difference between these offenses is that the Ohio offense does not necessarily require the failure to provide support to be in violation of a court order whereas the Michigan offense does,” the opinion states. “Because the Ohio crime can be committed without there being a support order in place, it is possible for the same conduct to be a crime in Ohio but not in Michigan. Therefore, the knowledge that defendant was found guilty of this crime is not, on its own, sufficient to conclude that the underlying conduct would have been a felony in Michigan. Accordingly, sentencing defendant as a habitual offender with a violation of this Ohio statute serving as the predicate offense requires the court to ascertain some knowledge of the facts underlying the Ohio conviction.”
Subscribe Now: For all the latest local developments, breaking news, and high school and college sports content.
There was no information in the sex-abuse case’s record about the underlying facts in Stevens’ nonsupport conviction, the appeals court said.
“There is nothing in the record suggesting that defendant was ordered to pay any such costs, suggesting that the conviction might not have arisen from the violation of an already-existing support order,” the opinion states. “Because we do not know if defendant’s failure to support a dependent conviction was committed in a violation of a court order, it necessarily follows that we do not know if the conduct giving rise to the Ohio conviction would have been a felony in Michigan.”
The prosecution had time to provide evidence that Stevens had violated a court order for support, the opinion said.
“Indeed, the initial resentencing hearing was adjourned specifically to afford the prosecution the opportunity to adequately address whether defendant’s Ohio conviction for possession of criminal tools would be a felony in Michigan,” the opinion says. “The initial hearing was adjourned in July, and the prosecution had until October to gather the information it needed to meet its burden. During that period, it decided to amend the information to list the nonsupport conviction as the predicate for defendant’s habitual offender status but failed to admit any evidence regarding the underlying facts of the nonsupport conviction.”
Giving the prosecution a second chance to meet its burden of proof would be against the principles of fairness and “implicate double jeopardy concerns because the prosecution’s failure to present sufficient evidence of an equivalent prior conviction is analogous to the reversal of a conviction based on insufficient evidence,” the opinion said.
The appellate panel rejected Stevens’ arguments in the latest appeal that his minimum sentencing guidelines range was not properly calculated.
— Contact reporter David Panian at dpanian@lenconnect.com or follow him on X, formerly Twitter: @lenaweepanian.
Michigan
LSU big man Jalen Reed commits to Michigan | UM Hoops.com
Michigan added a commitment from 6-foot-10, 245-pound LSU big man Jalen Reed today.
Reed suffered season-ending injuries in back-to-back seasons at LSU, playing 6 games in 2025-26 before an Achilles injury in November and eight games in 2024-25 before an ACL injury.
He is a former top-100 prospect as a recruit and started for LSU in 2023-24, averaging 7.9 points and 4.1 rebounds per game.
Michigan
Police say Oakland County teen missing, endangered
Authorities are asking for the public’s assistance to find a missing Oakland County teen who is considered endangered.
Adrianna Smith, 15, was last seen in the 3500 block of South Fenton Road, just south of the city of Holly in northwest Oakland County, according to Michigan State Police.
She is believed to have left her home in a 2002 Jeep Liberty with an adult male, possibly a man named Derek Girtman, MSP said.
Smith is described as having blonde hair and green eyes. She is about 5 feet, 7 inches tall and 160 pounds. She has one tattoo above her right knee and another on her left ankle.
Anyone with information about Adrianna’s whereabouts is asked to call 911 or the MSP Metro North Post at either (800) 495-4677 or (989) 370-8926.
Michigan
US supreme court sides with Michigan in its fight to shut down ageing pipeline
The supreme court on Wednesday sided with Michigan in ruling that the state’s lawsuit seeking to shut down a section of an ageing pipeline beneath a Great Lakes channel will stay in state court.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for a unanimous court that the Enbridge energy company waited too long to try to move the case to federal court.
The case is part of a messy legal dispute about a pipeline that has moved crude oil and natural gas liquids between Superior, Wisconsin, and Sarnia, Ontario, since 1953.
Dana Nessel, Michigan’s attorney general, sued in state court in June 2019 seeking to void the easement that allows Enbridge to operate a 4.5-mile (6.4km) section of pipeline under the straits of Mackinac, which link Lake Michigan and Lake Huron. Nessel, a Democrat, won a restraining order shutting down the pipeline from Ingham county judge James Jamo in June 2020, although Enbridge was allowed to continue operations after meeting safety requirements.
Enbridge moved the lawsuit into federal court in 2021, arguing it affects US and Canadian trade. But a three-judge panel from the sixth US circuit court of appeals sent the case back to Jamo in June 2024, finding that the company missed a 30-day deadline to change jurisdictions.
The pipeline at issue is called Line 5. Concerns over the section beneath the straits rupturing and causing a catastrophic spill have been growing since 2017, when Enbridge engineers revealed they had known about gaps in the section’s protective coating since 2014. A boat anchor damaged the section in 2018, intensifying fears of a spill.
The Michigan department of natural resources under Gretchen Whitmer, the state’s governor, revoked the straits easement for Line 5 in 2020. Enbridge filed a separate federal lawsuit challenging the revocation.
Enbridge won a ruling from a federal judge blocking the move, but Whitmer, a Democrat, has appealed to the sixth US circuit court of appeals. In March, the supreme court rejected Whitmer’s appeal claiming that she couldn’t be sued in federal court.
It was unclear how the federal ruling blocking Whitmer’s revocation attempt would affect Nessel’s case in state court. The company said in a statement that the judge in the Whitmer case had already decided federal regulators, not the state, are responsible for Line 5 safety and they had found no issues that would warrant shutting it down.
Enbridge also is seeking permits to encase the section of pipeline beneath the straits in a protective tunnel. The Michigan public service commission granted the relevant permits in 2023, but a coalition of environmental groups and Michigan tribes has filed a lawsuit seeking to void state permits for the tunnel. The state supreme court is weighing that case.
Enbridge also needs approval from the US army corps of engineers and the Michigan department of environment, Great Lakes and energy.
The pipeline is at the center of a separate legal dispute in Wisconsin as well. A federal judge in Madison last summer gave Enbridge three years to shut down part of Line 5 that runs across the Bad River Band of Lake Superior’s reservation. The company has appealed against the shutdown order to the seventh US circuit court of appeals, but it started work in February to reroute the line around the reservation.
The Bad River Band and environmental groups have filed a state lawsuit seeking to halt the work, arguing regulators have underestimated the damage the reroute construction will cause. That case also is pending.
-
Michigan58 seconds agoLSU big man Jalen Reed commits to Michigan | UM Hoops.com
-
Massachusetts7 minutes agoMassachusetts tops U.S. in AI job loss risk, Tufts report says
-
Minnesota13 minutes agoMinnesota woman detained by ICE needs emergency surgery for tennis ball-sized ovarian cyst, lawmakers say
-
Mississippi19 minutes ago
Jackson council reviews water authority as Horhn offers few details on plan
-
Missouri25 minutes agoMissouri Senate rejects increase to school funding despite shortfall in state payments
-
Montana31 minutes agoMontana Class AA girls track and field leaders ahead of Optimist Invite
-
Nebraska37 minutes agoToday in History – April 23: Cottonwood named Nebraska’s state tree
-
Nevada43 minutes agoThree more Nevada counties included in disaster declaration