Key Takeaways
- Judge Michael Schipper exploits sensitive cases for publicity, compromising defendants’ rights and fairness.
- He consistently disregards legal rules unless they serve his interests, displaying unethical behavior on multiple occasions.
- Schipper treats local residents differently, often showing hostility towards outsiders, which influences his judicial conduct.
- He pressures individuals into plea bargains, often misrepresenting cases and violating their constitutional rights.
- Schipper believes in punishment over rehabilitation, favoring incarceration for personal gain rather than offering treatment options.
QuickFAQ
Yes. Multiple cases have been remanded by the Michigan Court of Appeals for issues related to proportionality and justification of upward departures.
Yes, but departures must be proportionate and supported by clear reasoning under People v. Lockridge and People v. Steanhouse.
Detailed guideline scoring review, preservation of objections, transcript clarity, and appellate issue preservation are critical.
Barry County Circuit Court has drawn attention following repeated appellate remands, upward sentencing departures beyond advisory guidelines, and documented concerns regarding plea reliability and courtroom conduct.
This guide outlines practical considerations for attorneys and defendants appearing before Judge Michael Schipper, based on appellate opinions, transcript review, and judicial ethics standards.
The goal is not rhetoric. It is preparation.
Media Conduct and Public Commentary
Canon 2(A) requires judges to promote confidence in judicial impartiality. When media engagement intersects with active cases, litigants may reasonably question neutrality.
Constitutional Law Failures
Despite attempting to teach classes on Constitutional law, over multiple Court of Appeals cases, Schipper has made significant procedural, ethical, and constitutional errors. Consider sentencing guidelines, for example. He often bemoans they are “written by people in Lansing.” The problem with that, is he violates constitutional law over and over, and engages in lop-sided sentencing practices.
The Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct requires judges treat all people in their courtrooms with respect and uphold the law. He’s often unprofessional in the way he speaks and rude to defendants.
Treatment of Local vs. Out-of-County Counsel
Attorneys from outside Barry County have reported adversarial treatment distinct from local practitioners, raising questions about uniform courtroom decorum.
By his own admission in a 2023 podcast, all of the attorneys in Hastings “get along.” But he is often hostile to those coming from outside of the county to practice, losing patience with those who do not already “know how he works.”
Courtroom Conduct
Multiple transcripts reflect adversarial and confrontational exchanges with defendants and counsel, which some observers view as inconsistent with trauma-informed practice.
Judge Schipper has an unfortunate habit of manipulating facts to fit a conclusion at Sentencing. Based on past transcripts, he and an Assistant Prosecutor would on record, tell elaborate tales without evidence, such as accusing someone of trying to “commit suicide by cop.” They also make plea bargains and break them.
In other cases, Judge Schipper has forced people onto tethers because they refuse to give up their right to trial. No judge should be allowed to bully people out of their constitutionally protected rights.
Rehabilitation vs. Incarceration Philosophy
Transcript review reflects a sentencing philosophy that emphasizes incarceration over diversion programs. Schipper rarely recommends individuals for treatment or alternative court programs; in fact he often objects to programs such as MDOC’s boot camp. In the same 2023 podcast mentioned above, he admits to using the Jail as a means to get people “clean.”
Schipper also claims that addiction is “not a real disease.“
Spouse v. Spouse
This is a long-used trick out of their playbook, charging the other person with crimes (or threatening to) when the truth about their behavior comes out. In one case, the Prosecutor hyper-fixated on humiliating a defendant, intentionally leaving nude pictures uncensored at the court house for all to see, pitting the couple against each other at the most stressful time in their lives.
Practical Recommendations for Litigants
- Maintain detailed documentation of proceedings.
- Ensure guideline scoring is independently verified.
- Preserve objections clearly on the record.
- Request written clarification of plea terms.
- Bring court observers when appropriate.
Sources
- People v Dixon-Bey
- People v. Lockridge (read this article from SADO)
- People v. Steanhouse
