ANN ARBOR, Mich. – Defense attorney Ellen Michaels said that the resolution in the case involving former University of Michigan football head coach Sherrone Moore reflects “a careful legal process” and allows him to move forward with his family.
Speaking after a court hearing, Michaels said the case had been handled “with dignity and respect for all involved,” adding that the outcome was based on evidence and the law rather than “favoritism or public profile.”
“The resolution reflects the evidence and the law,” Michaels said. “This outcome is not the result of favoritism or public profile. It is the result of a careful legal process, a thorough investigation, and advocacy grounded in the facts.”
Moore was sentenced on Tuesday, April 14, in the Washtenaw County 14-A District Court before Judge Cedric Simpson to 18 months of probation.
He was ordered to pay a total of $1,345 in fines and court costs. He’s not allowed to use alcohol or drugs and must continue mental health treatment.
He’s not allowed to have any direct or indirect contact with Paige Shiver, the victim. He can’t discuss her online or go to her place of work.
Michaels said Moore and his wife, Kelli, are now focused on moving forward.
“He and his wife, Kelli, are ready to move forward with their family and focus on the next chapter,” Michaels said.
--> Paige Shiver releases statement after former Michigan football coach Sherrone Moore avoids jail time
Deferred sentence
The court issued a deferred sentence tied to probation, meaning the charges would be dismissed upon successful completion of the probationary period.
“Yes, probation deferred sentence, meaning at the end of the successful probationary period, the charges are dismissed,” Michaels said in response to a question from reporters.
“Your honor, I want to thank my Lord and savior, Jesus Christ, for his grace and guidance during this difficult time. I want to thank my wife, Kelli, for her support and strength in standing by me. I want to thank this court and its staff for their time and consideration. I am grateful to my attorney, Ellen Michaels, for her guidance. I’ve taken this process very seriously and worked closely with the probation department to prepare for today’s sentencing, and I am ready to proceed.”
Sherrone Moore before sentencing
Michaels declined to comment on why a detective did not disclose a prior working relationship relevant to the case, saying it was not adjudicated as part of the final disposition.
“That was never adjudicated because of the disposition that we reached,” Michaels said.
Pressed further on whether charges should have been filed at all, Michaels declined to answer directly, noting, “I’m a defense attorney. I have my own thoughts on that, which I’m not going to share at this time.”
Phone records
During her remarks, Michaels said phone records and witness statements ultimately undermined the basis for the original allegations.
She said communications between Sherrone and Shiver continued after an alleged directive to stop contact, as Shiver was his executive assistant with the Michigan Wolverines football program, and that the complainant’s follow-up statements differed from earlier accounts.
“The phone logs indicated that after that alleged directive, there were many calls between the two parties,” Michaels said.
Michaels added that the complainant later “retracted that statement,” saying the alleged cutoff in communication occurred later than initially reported.
She argued that the evidence showed no unwanted contact and therefore did not support stalking-related charges.
“There was no unwanted contact. There was no stalking,” Michaels said. “And because there was no stalking, there was no home invasion with the intent to stalk.”
Judge Cedric Simpson explained why key criminal charges fell apart in a case involving Moore and Shiver, noting that inconsistencies in phone records undermined the prosecution’s theory and ultimately led to a reduced sentence.
Simpson said investigators initially pursued multiple charges, including stalking and third-degree home invasion, based on the belief that Shiver had clearly told Moore on Dec. 8, 2025, to stop contacting her.
However, Simpson said that evidence later obtained, particularly call logs, contradicted that claim.
According to Simpson, records showed multiple phone calls between Moore and Shiver on Dec. 8, including calls in the afternoon and evening.
Those contacts, he said, directly conflicted with the allegation that Moore had been told earlier that morning to cease all communication.
“The very foundation of the stalking charge could not have been true,” Simpson said, noting that the continued contact invalidated the central element required to support the allegation.
Because the stalking charge served as a “predicate offense,” a necessary underlying charge for the more serious felony, Simpson said both charges could not legally proceed once that foundation failed.
Prosecutors, Simpson said, acted appropriately by declining to move forward after recognizing the inconsistency.
“They did the right thing, legally, morally, ethically; they could not proceed,” Simpson said.
A separate charge involving unlawful entry also faltered.
Simpson said evidence showed Moore had been given access to the residence, including a door code, by Shiver, undercutting claims that the entry was illegal.
After reviewing the evidence, both sides agreed to resolve the case based only on charges that could be supported.
“The right thing happened,” Simpson said. “No more, no less.”
In determining Moore’s sentence, Simpson said the court considered both the defendant’s conduct and its impact on Shiver, along with the full record reviewed by prosecutors, defense attorneys, and the court.
The case ultimately concluded with Moore pleading to the charges back on March 6, deemed legally sustainable after the review.
“The University of Michigan gave this man limitless power and emboldened him to do whatever he wanted for years with no accountability. December 10th was the most terrifying day of my life.
The criminal acts he committed were extremely frightening and violent. He broke into my apartment, crying, yelling, enraged, and came at me with knives. I was threatened, and I feared for my life. Today’s sentence does not reflect the harm done to me or the objective evidence in this case."
Paige Shiver
Moore’s history
Michaels also praised the judge’s handling of the case, saying the court considered Moore’s personal history and the circumstances individually.
“Judge Simpson is such a revered jurist because he sees people as people,” Michaels said.
She added that Moore’s prior history and the judge’s assessment of the evidence were central to the outcome.
Supporters for Moore
Outside the courtroom, several supporters offered Moore encouragement as proceedings concluded, with one person urging him to “keep your head up” and focus on his family and future opportunities.
The case is now considered resolved under the terms of the deferred sentence, and Moore is expected to comply with probation requirements before the charges are formally dismissed.
“Today’s sentence does not reflect the seriousness of Moore’s unlawful entry and aggressive attack on Ms. Shiver on December 10th. Following his termination from the university, this deranged 6 foot 4, 285-pound man broke into her apartment and physically threated her with knives.
For several years, the University of Michigan’s leadership looked the other way and allowed Ms. Shiver to be exploited and abused by Moore.
The university enabled Moore and others in positions of authority within the Athletic Department, fostered the ongoing and escalating abuse, and advanced a culture that cared not about the hostile environment but instead was focused only on winning football games.
It is our expectation that Interim University President Domenico Grasso, President-Elect Kent Syverud, General Counsel Tim Lynch, new Football Coach Kyle Whittingham, the Board of Regents and major donors will take responsibility for the harm done to Ms. Shiver and others and commit to building a NCAA and Title IX compliant Athletic Department.”
Andrew M. Stroth and Steven A. Hart, attorneys for Ms. Paige Shiver
--> ‘You take her for granted’: What judge said about Sherrone Moore’s wife during sentencing
Human impact
Michaels said that the court’s consideration of the support of Moore’s wife, Kelli, reflects the human element of the justice system and the way judges evaluate cases on an individual basis.
During remarks after a court hearing, Michaels said Judge Simpson’s approach highlighted the importance of personal circumstances alongside legal facts in reaching a decision.
“I think that’s human,” Michaels said when asked about the judge’s reference to Moore’s support. “He sees people as people. He recognizes that what happens in a court of law is not removed from human behavior and from emotion and from relationship.”
Michaels said the court’s handling of the case reflected broader principles of individualized justice.
“In recognizing Kelli Moore’s behavior and groundedness and kindness and willingness to open her heart, I think that shows it’s important,” Michaels said. “It’s all part of the process.”
Michaels added that judges are tasked with weighing each case on its own merits.
“We’re human beings, and this happened because we’re human beings, and that needs to be a factor,” Michaels said. “That’s why judges say every person is judged individually.”
Michaels said Moore was considered in light of his personal history and character.
“In this case, Sherrone Moore was judged by his past history of living a solid life and by doing good things,” she said, adding that the court viewed the matter as an isolated incident.
She said the outcome reflected those considerations.
“The punishment given by Judge Simpson today is a reflection of all those things, as it should be,” Michaels said.
More: Judge addresses video of former Michigan football coach Sherrone Moore hugging deputy in courtroom