Two defendants who previously fell victim to Barry County Judge Michael Schipper‘s malicious plea deals and sentencing may finally receive fair outcomes.
According to Court Records, two very different cases face resentencing tomorrow, April 2, 2025, after the Michigan Court of Appeals found Judge Michael Schipper’s sentencings to be unjust, failing to honor and interpret Michigan Sentencing Guidelines and the law as prescribed by the Legislative branch.
These resentencing hearings come at an interesting time, on the heels of Schipper’s very recent and very significant downward departure in People v. Cobbs, where he sentenced a first-time offender to 6 months in jail and offered her speaking engagement opportunities, rather than impose the upward departures he is well-known for and exercises in other cases.
The Impact of Hastings Court-Appointed Attorneys
At the onset of both cases, court-appointed, Hastings, Michigan-based defenders were at the helm, rather than private attorneys, reinforcing a troubling trend.
In a 2023 podcast, Judge Schipper describes a cozy relationship with the attorneys in Hastings, making it quite unlikely that any of them would ever challenge his long history of unethical behavior, to include biasing cases, violating plea agreements, and cruel and unusual sentencing practices.
In fact, nearly all of the recent Barry County cases where defendants’ suffered significant Constitutional Rights violations and were remanded by Michigan Court of Appeals for correction begin with Hastings, Michigan court-appointed attorneys failing to object to issues at the time of sentencing.
This includes the case of Dean Myers, who has an upcoming Evidentiary Hearing for a new trial based on the shoddy investigation.
They also failed to report Judge Schipper’s unprofessional conduct to the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission, ignoring ethical obligations.
You may also recall that nearly every current attorney on the Hastings court-appointed defender rotation also donated to the current Prosecuting Attorney’s initial election campaign.
Hastings does not have an independent public defender organization, relying entirely on a rotation of private practice attorneys, though it is allegedly in the works.
Thankfully, both individuals have different appellate attorneys through the State Appellate Defender’s Office.
People v. Arizola
In People v. Arizola, the Michigan Sentencing guidelines were 19-76 months. Judge Schipper sentenced him to 240 to 480 months.
When listening to the Oral Argument here, the defendant’s attorney calls out many issues in the case, specifically citing the Barry County Prosecutor’s Office engaging in “intellectually dishonest” behavior.
Intellectual Dishonesty equates to a lack of integrity in the pursuit or communication of ideas, knowledge, or information.
It also involves intentionally misrepresenting, omitting, or manipulating facts, arguments, or evidence to deceive or mislead others.
This is an accurate description of the chronic misconduct under the Assistant Prosecutor’s 18-year reign of misconduct, such as falsely claiming individuals do not have legally binding plea agreements, even though he signed Plea Agreement forms and assured particular outcomes in exchange for no contest pleas.
During his portion of the oral argument, the now former prosecutor can also be heard complaining about family members advocating for Mr. Arizola, and how it impacted the additional charging he would have sought.
Mr. Arizola’s initial court-appointed attorney was Kathryn Russell, of Russell and Hoel in Hastings, Michigan.
People v. Riddle
Timothy Riddle’s story is a tragic one that comes as the result of lack of sufficient resources for juvenile lifer cases, and the fall out that occurs when they are not given appropriate mental health resources to succeed. His crime was committed in the throes of addiction and a mental health emergency, neither of which Barry County is adequately equipped or funded to help with.
In a blatant display of how little law enforcement understand about juvenile brain science and the disservice the criminal justice system has done to juvenile lifers, Michigan State Police Lt. Christensen claims Mr. Riddle was “institutionalized.”
Sources close to the situation tell me that Mr. Riddle was released without any mental healthcare or resources to guide him through reentry, essentially setting him up to fail. It is a story I plan to revisit after his resentencing.
As with many Barry County cases, this case comes with its fair share of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct.
In 2021, Judge Schipper made public comments to The Hastings Banner regarding Mr. Riddle’s case.
This violates Michigan’s Judicial Canon 3(6), stating judges must refrain from making public comments on pending cases.
Astonishingly, this came after his 2019 run-in with the Judicial Tenure Commission, where they cautioned him about making public comments on a different case.
Not at all shockingly, the same Assistant Prosecutor was pivotal in Mr. Riddle’s botched bench trial and as with other cases, was responsible for charging decisions coming out of the the Prosecutor’s Office, once again instigating excessive charges and sentencing.
Mr. Riddle’s initial court-appointed attorney was Kerri Selleck; she also failed to stand-up to either Judge Schipper or the Assistant Prosecutor.
His appellate attorney has been much more dedicated in pursuit of fairness and justice.
Between the Court of Appeals’ intervention and the removal of the Assistant Prosecutor, it is hoped that fair and legal outcomes will prevail.
Hidden Scandal: Assistant Prosecutor Removed
On December 30, 2024, a formal complaint and request for investigation was submitted to Michigan Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Clement regarding the Assistant Prosecutor’s unethical behavior across multiple cases.
In January 2025, a move was initiated. The receiving Prosecuting attorney did not respond to requests for comment.
Update, 4/2/2025: Resentencing Outcomes
As I feared, Judge Schipper indeed defied the Court of Appeals’ orders, just as he did with Mario Velasquez.
Mr. Velasquez will be resentenced on April 17, 2025 before Judge William Doherty, as the Court of Appeals barred Judge Schipper from resentencing, as he refused to follow their previous directions to resentence within guidelines.
Mark Arizola was resentenced wildly outside of the original 19-76 month guidelines. True to his standard resentencing scheme, Schipper cut the low-end of the sentence in half, requiring 120 to 480 months, down from an initial 240 months.
Timothy Riddle’s resentencing was rescheduled to June 18 due to a “miscommunication” with Michigan DOC.
“Miscommunications” with MDOC are often due to the court’s failure to file a writ or arrange video conferencing, which may be the case here, as no writ was filed for the April Hearing.
It is sometimes used as a stalling tactic.
Update, 7/4/25
Judge Schipper once again failed to sentence within guidelines, even after being directed by the Court of Appeals, once again demonstrating that in his court, second chances are not available to Barry County residents.
