People v. Massey

• Decision Date: 09 November 1984
• Docket Number: Docket No. 68736
• Citation: 137 Mich.App. 480,358 N.W.2d 615
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Attorney General, Intervenor-Appellant, v. Mark Alan MASSEY, Defendant-Appellee. 137 Mich.App. 480, 358 N.W.2d 615
• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US

Page 615

358 N.W.2d 615

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellant and Attorney General, Intervenor-Appellant, v. Mark Alan MASSEY, Defendant-Appellee.

Docket No. 68736.

137 Mich.App. 480, 358 N.W.2d 615

Court of Appeals of Michigan.

Submitted March 14, 1984.

Decided Sept. 17, 1984.

Released for Publication Nov. 9, 1984.

[137 MICHAPP 483] Joseph P. Kwiatkowski, Pros. Atty., and Robert J. Butts, Asst. Pros. Atty., Cheboygan, for the people.

Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Louis J. Caruso, Sol. Gen., and Terrence P. Grady and Russell E. Prins, Asst. Attys. Gen., for intervening plaintiff.

Gillard, Bauer, Mazrum & Florip by Roger C. Bauer, Alpena, for defendant on appeal.

Before SHEPHERD, P.J., and ALLEN and KEYES, ^* JJ.

SHEPHERD, Presiding Judge.

Defendant was convicted by a jury of receiving and concealing state-owned stolen property valued at over $100, M.C.L. Sec. 750.535; M.S.A. Sec. 28.803. He was sentenced to pay a fine of $1,000 and ordered to pay costs of $1,276.83. Later the trial court entered an order setting aside defendant's conviction and granting his motion to quash. The prosecutor, and the Attorney General, as intervenor, appeal by leave granted. We reverse and reinstate the conviction. In so doing, we hold that the statute declaring abandoned property of historical or recreational value found on the bottom of the Great Lakes to be state property is [137 MICHAPP 484] constitutional and does not interfere with federal maritime or admiralty law.

On August 24, 1981, defendant was observed proceeding through the Straits of Mackinac in a tugboat, apparently in possession of two wood stock anchors. At trial, defendant admitted taking a wood stock anchor from the bottom of Lake Michigan and claimed that he was salvaging the anchor for a friend as a favor for past services. The anchor was identified as a wood stock anchor believed to be off the sunken wreck, The Richard Winslow, which sank in the late 1800's and which was the first four-masted sailing vessel on the Great Lakes.

At defendant's jury trial, the jury was requested to make a determination under M.C.L. Sec. 299.51; M.S.A. Sec. 13.21 whether the anchor in question had significant historical or recreational value since, under that statute, the State of Michigan had reserved to itself a possessory right to property found on the bottom of the Great Lakes which had either significant recreational or historical value. The anchor was valued at approximately $1,800, unrestored. On May 12, 1982, the jury returned tis verdict finding defendant guilty.

On October 28, 1982, after defendant was sentenced, the trial court set aside defendant's conviction and granted his motion to quash, finding that M.C.L. Sec. 299.51 et seq.; M.S.A. Sec. 13.21 et seq. was unconstitutional as it applied to marine salvage and that the anchor, therefore, was not the property of the State. The trial court found the statute unconstitutional "not per se but as applied to marine salvage in the Great Lakes under the facts of this case, which salvage is governed and preempted by [federal] admiralty law * * * ".

Maritme and admiralty matters are within the [137 MICHAPP 485] jurisdiction of the federal government. Article III, Sec. 2 of the United States Constitution provides that the judicial power of the United States "shall extend * * * to all Cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction * * * ". Where the constitution assigns jurisdiction to the federal government, federal law is supreme, "any thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding". U.S. Const., art. VI, clause 2. The right to salvage is a matter governed by maritime or admiralty law. Mason v. The Blaireau, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch) 240, 2 L.Ed. 266 (1804); Treasure Salvors, Inc. v. Abandoned Sailing Vessel Believed to be the Nuestra Senora De Atocha, 408 F.Supp. 907 (S.D. Fla., 1976), aff'd. with modification 569 F.2d 330 (CA 5, 1978).

Title and dominion over the actual lands which are covered by the waters of the Great Lakes and which are within state boundries belong to each state within which those lands are located. In Michigan, the title to such lands is held in trust for the public pursuant to the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act, M.C.L. Sec. 322.701 et seq. M.S.A. Sec. 13.700(1) et seq. It is clear, therefore, that the actual land upon which submerged ships or other property lie or are partially embedded belongs to the State of Michigan subject to a trust for the benefit of the public. Although the federal government, by virtue of its jurisdiction over maritime and admiralty matters, retains authority as to matters and issues relevant to navigation through the Great Lakes, the United States Constitution gives the federal government no such specific authority over the beds or bottomlands of navigable waters. Nedtweg v. Wallace, 237 Mich. 14, 16, 208 N.W. 51 (1927). See also Hilt v. Weber, 252 Mich. 198, 202-203, 233 N.W. 159 (1930).

[137 MICHAPP 486] By virtue of its 1980 amendment of the aborigional records and antiquities act, M.C.L. Sec. 299.51 et seq.; M.S.A. Sec. 13.21 et seq., the Michigan Legislature proclaimed state ownership and authority over property of historical or recreational value found on the "state owned bottomlands of the great lakes". The state declared its interest to be superior to that of a finder of such abandoned property. ¹ The critical question in the instant case is whether the state may declare its ownership of submerged property or whether such assertion of ownership is in conflict with federal preemption of maritime and admiralty matters.

In general, statutes are presumed to be constitutional unless the contrary clearly appears. Where there is doubt, every possible construction not clearly inconsistent with the language of the statute and its subject matter is to be interpreted in favor of the statute's constitutionality. Royal Auto Parts v. Michigan, 118 Mich.App. 284, 324 N.W.2d 607 (1982); Nunn v. George A. Cantrick Co., Inc., 113 Mich.App. 486, 317 N.W.2d 331 (1982).

Although the federal government retains jurisdiction over maritime and admiralty matters, states retain significant autonomy, and in unpreempted areas, the federal government has traditionally deferred to the historic police power of the states. Federal preemption of that power will not be dictated "unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress". Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U.S. 218, 230, 67 S.Ct. 1146, 1152, 91 L.Ed. 1447 (1947). In the exercise of its police powers, [137 MICHAPP 487] or presumably in other related areas in which it has retained autonomy, Michigan may act in maritime and admiralty matters concurrently with the federal government. See Huron Portland Cement Co. v. Detroit, 362 U.S. 440, 80 S.Ct. 813, 4 L.Ed.2d 852 (1960). Only where federal and state laws inevitably collide, or where congress has unmistakably expressed its intent to occupy the field, does federal preemption occur. Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul, 373 U.S. 132, 142, 83 S.Ct. 1210, 1217, 10 L.Ed.2d 248 (1963).

While in The Lottawanna, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 558, 574, 22 L.Ed. 654 (1874), the Supreme Court found that federal jurisdiction extended to "all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction", we find that, with passage of M.C.L. Sec. 299.51, the State of Michigan has not intruded or otherwise impermissibly interfered with the uniformity or purpose of admiralty and maritime law. Rather, the state has supplemented the control over Great Lakes bottomlands granted to it by the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act and the federal Submerged Lands Act, 43 USC 1301 et seq., so as to include items of historical and recreational value located on or contained therein.

As generally defined, at least in terms of federal maritime or admiralty law, salvage is "the compensation allowed to persons by whose assistance a ship or her cargo has been saved, in whole or in part, from impending peril on the sea, or in recovering such property from actual loss, as in cases of shipwreck, derelict, or recapture". The Blackwall, 77 U.S. (10 Wall.) 1, 12, 19 L.Ed. 870 (1870). As to marine property which has been abandoned, it appears generally that a government may proclaim itself owner of abandoned property within its jurisdiction, but without a clear legislative [137 MICHAPP 488] statement to that effect, the courts should adhere to traditional maritime law principles of finder and salvor. United...