9.10Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA)—Deferred Adjudication 

The Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA), MCL 762.11 to MCL 762.15, “provides a mechanism for individuals who commit certain crimes between the time of their seventeenth and [twenty-sixth¹] birthdays to be excused from having a criminal record.” People v Rahilly, 247 Mich App 108, 113 (2001). “The HYTA evidences a legislative desire that persons in this age group not be stigmatized with criminal records for unreflective and immature acts.” People v Khanani, 296 Mich App 175, 178 (2012) (quotation marks and citation omitted).

A.Eligibility Requirements

Unless the individual committed a crime listed in MCL 762.11(3) or is a person described in MCL 762.11(4),² he or she may be eligible to be assigned as a youthful trainee. Beginning October 1, 2021,³ to be assigned as a youthful trainee the individual must:

•plead guilty to a criminal offense, MCL 762.11(2);

•commit the crime on or after his or her 18th birthday but before his or her 26th birthday, MCL 762.11(2);

•or be an individual over 14 years of age whose jurisdiction has been waived under MCL 764.27, MCL 762.15;

•consent to the assignment of youthful trainee status, MCL 762.11(2);

•and if the offense was committed on or after the person’s 21st birthday, the prosecutor must also consent, MCL 762.11(2);

•the prosecutor must consult with the victim regarding a person’s eligibility for youthful trainee status if the person was charged with an offense listed in MCL 762.11(3) but pleaded guilty to any other offense or will be eligible for youthful trainee status under MCL 762.11(4), MCL 762.11(2). 

See SCAO Form MC 242, Assignment to Youthful Trainee Status. 

1.Caselaw Interpreting Eligibility Requirements

Defendants who plead nolo contendere or are found guilty following a trial are not eligible for HYTA status. People v Harns, 227 Mich App 573, 579-580 (1998), vacated in part on other grounds 459 Mich 895 (1998);⁴ People v Dash, 216 Mich App 412, 414 (1996).

The statute governing an individual’s assignment to the status of youthful trainee does not contain any language limiting the number of times an individual may utilize the provisions of the statute. See MCL 762.11 et seq. A “defendant [i]s not ineligible for sentencing under [HYTA] solely because he was convicted of two criminal offenses.” People v Giovannini, 271 Mich App 409, 410 (2006). “Interpreting MCL 762.11 to permit placement under [HYTA] only in cases involving a single offense would work contrary to the discretion invested in the trial court and to the overall purpose of the act.” Giovannini, 271 Mich App at 417.

2.Decision to Assign Youthful Trainee Status is Discretionary

A trial court’s decision concerning a defendant’s assignment under the HYTA is discretionary, and accordingly, is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. People v Khanani, 296 Mich App 175, 177-178 (2012); People v Giovannini, 271 Mich App 409, 411 (2006). “An abuse of discretion occurs when the court chooses an outcome that falls outside the range of reasonable and principled outcomes.” Khanani, 296 Mich App at 178 (citation and quotation marks omitted).

 MCL 762.11 is remedial “and should be construed liberally for the advancement of the remedy.”People v Bobek, 217 Mich App 524, 529 (1996). However, “[i]n exercising its discretion, a trial court should consider the seriousness of the offense as a factor on an equal footing with the defendant’s age.” Khanani, 296 Mich App at 179.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying youthful trainee status where:

•A 17-year-old defendant was charged with “breaking and entering an occupied dwelling with the intent to commit larceny, punishable by a maximum of 15 years incarceration, and arson of a dwelling house, which carries a 20-year maximum sentence[.]” People v Fitchett, 96 Mich App 251, 254 (1980) (noting the trial court “properly consider[ed] the species of offenses in its exercise of discretion”).

•A 17-year-old defendant committed armed robbery. People v Teske, 147 Mich App 105, 106-109 (1985) (noting the trial court properly considered the defendant’s age in combination with the seriousness of the offense and additional information about the defendant’s background presented to it).⁵

“[T[he trial court’s decision to grant youthful-trainee status fell outside the range of reasonable and principled outcomes in light of the relevant circumstances, including defendant’s age, [(19 years old),] the seriousness of the home-invasion offense and the timing of its commission a mere three weeks after being placed on bond pending sentencing for the earlier offenses and even being instructed at that time by the trial court and his probation officer of the benefits of HYTA treatment and that he could be referred for HYTA consideration.” Khanani, 296 Mich App at 179-182 (rejecting the defendant’s argument that he was a follower, not a leader, because he “exploit[ed] his knowledge of [the] home to invade it” because he had a relationship with the family, and noting that the trial court stated that the defendant was “frighten[ing],” and appeared to agree with the prosecution’s statement that the defendant was “a serious predator”). The Court also noted that the trial court justified granting HYTA status based in part on its belief that “the defendant’s parents deserved acknowledgement for their efforts to raise defendant to be a productive citizen,” and held that this “was not a principled basis on which to grant youthful-trainee status.” Id. at 182.

3.Sentencing Guidelines

A trial court’s decision to grant sentencing under HYTA “should not be reviewed as a decision to depart from the guidelines.” People v Khanani, 296 Mich App 175, 183 (2012). “[T]he sentencing guidelines have not been held to apply to the decision whether to grant youthful-trainee status.” Id.⁶ 

B.Individuals Who Are Not Eligible—Statutory Exceptions

An individual is not eligible for youthful trainee status if the offense he or she committed is any of the following:

•A felony punishable by life imprisonment. MCL 762.11(3)(a).

•A major controlled substance offense. MCL 762.11(3)(b).

•A traffic offense. MCL 762.11(3)(c).

•A violation, attempted violation, or conspiracy to violate MCL 750.520b (first-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-I)); MCL 750.520c (second-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-II)); MCL 750.520d (third-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-III), other than MCL 750.520d(1)(a) (victim 13 to 15 years old); or MCL 750.520e (fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-IV), other than MCL 750.520e(1)(a) (victim 13 to 15 years old and actor 5 or more years older than victim). MCL 762.11(3)(d).

•A violation, attempted violation, or conspiracy to violate MCL 750.520g (assault with intent to commit CSC), with the intent to commit CSC-I, CSC-II, CSC-III (other than MCL 750.520d(1)(a)); or CSC-IV (other than MCL 750.520e(1)(a)). MCL 762.11(3)(e).

In addition, an individual is not eligible for youthful trainee status if any of the following apply:

•The individual was previously convicted of, or adjudicated for, a listed offense for which registration is required under the Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA).⁷  MCL 762.11(4)(a).

•The individual is charged with a listed offense for which registration is required under the SORA, and the individual fails to carry the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that he or she is not likely to engage in further listed offenses. MCL 762.11(4)(b).

•The court determines that the offense involved a factor set out in MCL 750.520b(1)(a)-(h) (CSC-I); MCL 750.520c(1)(a)-(l) (CSC-II), MCL 750.520d(1)(b)-(e) (CSC-III), or MCL 750.520e(1)(b)-(f) (CSC-IV). MCL 762.11(4)(c).

C.Terms and Conditions Imposed When Youthful Trainee Status is Assigned

Once a person is granted assignment as a youthful trainee, the court is required to take certain actions depending on whether the underlying charge was an offense punishable by imprisonment for a term of more than one year or a year or less. See MCL 762.13.

1.Offenses Punishable by More Than One Year

“If an individual is assigned to the status of a youthful trainee and the underlying charge is an offense punishable by imprisonment for a term of more than 1 year, the court shall do 1 of the following:

(a) Except as provided in [MCL 762.13(2)⁸], commit the individual to the department of corrections for custodial supervision and training for not more than 2 years. If the individual is less than 21 years of age, he or she must be committed to an institutional facility designated by the department for that purpose.

(b) Place the individual on probation for not more than 3 years subject to probation conditions as provided in [MCL 771.3].^[9] The terms and conditions of probation may include participation in a drug treatment court . . . .

(c) Commit the individual to the county jail for not more than 1 year.^[10]

(d) Except as provided in [MCL 762.13(2)¹¹], commit the individual to the department of corrections under subdivision (a) or to the county jail under subdivision (c), and then place the individual on probation for not more than 1 year subject to probation conditions as provided in [MCL 771.3].”¹² MCL 762.13(1).

2.Offenses Punishable by One Year of Less

“If an individual is assigned to the status of youthful trainee and the underlying charge is for an offense punishable by imprisonment for 1 year or less, the court shall place the individual on probation for not more than 2 years, subject to probation conditions as provided in [MCL 771.3].” MCL 762.13(3).

3.Probation Terms and Conditions—Mandatory and Discretionary

“An individual placed on probation under [MCL 762.13] must be under the supervision of a probation officer.” MCL 762.13(4) (emphasis added). “Upon commitment to and receipt by the department of corrections, a youthful trainee is subject to the direction of the department of corrections.” Id. 

If the court orders an individual committed to the county jail as a condition of probation, “the court may authorize work release or release for educational purposes.” MCL 762.13(5) (emphasis added).

Electronic monitoring. An individual assigned to HYTA status for an offense committed on or after his or her twenty-first birthday may be subject to electronic monitoring during his or her probationary term as provided under MCL 771.3. MCL 762.11(6) (emphasis added).

Supervision fee. Unless waived under MCL 762.13(7),¹³ the trial court must order payment of a probation supervision fee in each order of probation for an individual placed on probation under MCL 762.13. MCL 762.13(6). The fee is payable when probation is ordered, but may be paid in installments upon approval by the court. Id. MCL 762.13(6) sets out the amount of the supervision fee, which depends on whether the individual is subject to electronic monitoring.

“A person must not be subject to more than 1 supervision fee at the same time. If a supervision fee is ordered for a person for any month or months during which that person already is subject to a supervision fee, the court shall waive the fee having the shorter remaining duration.” MCL 762.13(6).

Amendment of probation terms. The trial court has discretion to amend the terms of probation imposed under HYTA. People v Bobek, 217 Mich App 524, 531 (1996) (noting HYTA does not prohibit modification, and MCL 771.2 permits the court to alter and amend a probation order at any time). However, the trial court abused its discretion by discharging the defendant from youthful trainee status after the media found out about her case because the discharge “was unrelated to her rehabilitation[.]” Bobek, 217 Mich App at 531-532 (holding a court must not discharge a defendant from probation without “sufficient reason”).

4.Employment or School Requirements

“If the court assigns an individual to the status of youthful trainee under [MCL 762.11], the court may require the individual to maintain employment or to attend a high school, high school equivalency program, community college, college, university, or trade school,” or require the individual “to actively seek employment or entry into a high school, high school equivalency program, community college, college, university, or trade school.” MCL 762.11(5).

5.Mandatory Costs and Crime Victim Assessment¹⁴

Under MCL 769.1k(1)(a), the court must impose the minimum state costs as set out in MCL 769.1j¹⁵ at the time the defendant is sentenced, at the time the defendant’s sentence is delayed, or at the time entry of judgment is statutorily deferred. MCL 769.1k(1)(a).

In addition, an individual assigned to youthful trainee status who is charged with a felony offense must pay a $130 crime victim assessment. MCL 780.905(1)(a). An individual who commits a misdemeanor or ordinance violation must pay a $75 crime victim assessment. MCL 780.905(1)(b). Only one crime victim assessment per case may be ordered, even when the case involves multiple offenses. MCL 780.905(2).

D.Termination or Revocation of Youthful Trainee Status

A youthful trainee is entitled to a hearing before the court revokes his or her status. People v Webb, 89 Mich App 50, 53 (1979); People v Roberson, 22 Mich App 664, 668-669 (1970).

1.Discretionary Revocation

“Subject to [MCL 762.12(2)], the court of record having jurisdiction over the criminal offense referred to in [MCL 762.11] may, at any time, terminate its consideration of the individual as a youthful trainee or, once having assigned the individual to the status of a youthful trainee, may at its discretion revoke that status any time before the individual’s final release.” MCL 762.12(1).

2.Mandatory Revocation

Under MCL 762.12(2), a court must revoke HYTA status if the individual pleads guilty to or is convicted of any of the following offenses during the period of HYTA assignment:

•a felony for which the maximum penalty is life imprisonment;

•a major controlled substance offense;

•a firearm offense; or

•a violation, attempted violation, or conspiracy to violate any of the following:

•MCL 750.82 (felonious assault);

•MCL 750.84 (assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder);

•MCL 750.88 (assault with intent to rob while unarmed);

•MCL 750.110a (home invasion);

•MCL 750.224f (felon in possession of a firearm);

•MCL 750.226 (going armed with a dangerous weapon with unlawful intent);

•MCL 750.227 (carrying a concealed weapon (CCW));

•MCL 750.227a (unlawful possession of a pistol by a licensee);

•MCL 750.227b (felony-firearm or possession and use of a pneumatic gun in furtherance of committing or attempting to commit a felony);

•MCL 750.520b (first-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-I));

•MCL 750.520c (second-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-II));

•MCL 750.520d (third-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-III)), except under MCL 750.520d(1)(a) (victim at least 13 but under 16 years of age);

•MCL 750.520e (fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-IV)), except under MCL 750.520e(1)(a) (victim at least 13 but under 16 years of age, and defendant 5 or more years older than the victim);

•MCL 750.520g (assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct), with the intent to commit a violation of MCL 750.520b (CSC-I), MCL 750.520c (CSC-II), MCL 750.520d (CSC-III), or MCL 750.520e (CSC-IV), except with intent to violate MCL 750.520d(1)(a) (victim at least 13 but under 16 years of age) or MCL 750.520e(1)(a) (victim at least 13 but under 16 years of age, and defendant 5 or more years older than the victim);

•MCL 750.529a (carjacking); or

•MCL 750.530 (unarmed robbery).

Additionally, willful violation of the Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA), MCL 28.721 et seq. requires revocation of HYTA status. MCL 762.12(3).¹⁶

3.Adjudication of Guilt and Imposition of Sentence

“Upon termination of consideration or revocation of status as a youthful trainee, the court may enter an adjudication of guilt and proceed as provided by law.” MCL 762.12(3).

“If the status of youthful trainee is revoked, an adjudication of guilt is entered, and a sentence is imposed, the court in imposing sentence shall specifically grant credit against the sentence for time served as a youthful trainee in an institutional facility of the department of corrections or in a county jail.” MCL 762.12(3). See also Carr v Midland Co Concealed Weapons Licensing Bd, 259 Mich App 428, 435 (2003) (noting, in the context of determining whether a person who successfully completes probation under § 7411 may obtain a concealed pistol license, that the Legislature’s intent in designing HYTA was to “require a guilty plea that will automatically result in a conviction and sentencing upon failure by the defendant to successfully complete the program”).

E.Successful Completion Under HYTA

“If consideration of an individual as a youthful trainee is not terminated and the status of youthful trainee is not revoked as provided in [MCL 762.12], upon final release of the individual from the status as youthful trainee, the court shall discharge the individual and dismiss the proceedings.” MCL 762.14(1).

Except in the circumstances listed below, assignment of an individual to youthful trainee status “is not a conviction for a crime,” and “the individual assigned to the status of youthful trainee shall not suffer a civil disability or loss of right or privilege following his or her release from that status because of his or her assignment as a youthful trainee.” MCL 762.14(2).

The following are exceptions to the general rule that assignment to youthful trainee status is not a conviction:

•Assignment to youthful trainee status before October 1, 2004 for a listed offense constitutes a conviction for purposes of registering under the SORA; however, “[a]n individual who is assigned to and successfully completes a term of supervision under [HYTA] is not convicted for purposes of [the SORA].” MCL 28.722(a)(ii); see also MCL 762.14(3). Further, an individual is not considered convicted if “a petition was granted under [MCL 28.728c] at any time allowing the individual to discontinue registration under [the SORA], including a reduced registration period that extends to or past July 1, 2011, regardless of the tier designation that would apply on and after that date.” MCL 28.722(a)(ii).¹⁷

•Assignment to youthful trainee status constitutes a conviction that is counted for purposes of scoring the prior record variables in the sentencing guidelines. MCL 777.50(4)(a)(i).

F.Record of Deferral

“Unless the court enters a judgment of conviction against the individual for the criminal offense under [MCL 762.12], all proceedings regarding the disposition of the criminal charge and the individual’s assignment as youthful trainee shall be closed to public inspection, but shall be open to the courts of this state, the department of corrections, the [Department of Health and Human Services], law enforcement personnel[,] and . . . prosecuting attorneys for use only in the performance of their duties.” MCL 762.14(4).

As used in MCL 762.14(4), the term “all proceedings” means “all matters brought before a court in an action in which youthful trainee status has been granted.” People v Bobek, 217 Mich App 524, 530 (1996) (holding the trial court did not err in closing the hearing on the defendant’s motion for release from youthful trainee status and dismissal of her case because the motion was filed after the defendant was assigned to youthful trainee status, and explaining “[c]losure of the hearing was consistent with the remedial nature” of HYTA). See also People v GR, 331 Mich App 58, 63-64 (2020) (citing Bobek, the Court rejected the prosecution’s argument that MCL 762.14(4) should be “interpreted to only close proceedings from public view after the individual has successfully completed the terms of their sentence and been discharged from youthful trainee status,” and held the probation review hearings were properly closed to the public under the plain language of MCL 762.14(4)) (quotation marks omitted).

HYTA’s provision regarding closing proceedings to the public controls over MCL 803.223 and MCR 6.935 because it is more specific, and because “both MCL 803.223 and MCR 6.935 are silent regarding HYTA, and neither MCL 803.223 nor MCR 6.935 prohibit closing proceedings to the public.” GR, 331 Mich App at 67. Similarly, assuming MCR 3.925(A)(1) applies under the circumstances, it does not affect HYTA’s mandate to close the proceedings to the public because MCR 3.925(A)(1) is “silent as to the more specific class of individuals to which defendants belong: juveniles who have been assigned youthful-trainee status under HYTA.” GR, 331 Mich App at 68.

MCL 762.14(4), as applied to require the closure of a probation review hearing concerning a defendant who was assigned youthful trainee status, does not violate the First Amendment right of access held by the public under the test from Press-Enterprise Co v Superior Court, 479 US 1, 13-14 (1986) (Press-Enterprise II).¹⁸ GR, 331 Mich App at 68-73. The Court specifically noted that HYTA is “designed to give juveniles a second chance by providing them an opportunity to avoid having a criminal record and keeping the proceedings closed to public inspection,” and “keeping the proceedings at issue open to the public would defeat the rehabilitative aims of HYTA.” GR, 331 Mich App at 72-73.