October, 2015

BB 258771:  The trial court’s very brief instruction that self-defense was a defense to felon in possession of a firearm was inadequate and rendered the trial unfair.  The trial court also reversibly erred in failing to instruct that self-defense was a defense to felony firearm.  Alternatively, trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to ensure that the jury understood that self-defense applied to the charges of felon in possession of a firearm and felony firearm.

BB 258771:  Defendant is entitled to resentencing where the 58-month minimum term of sentence for felon in possession of a firearm, which is above the sentencing guidelines range, is unreasonable.

BB 258714:  Defendant is entitled to an amended judgment of sentence where the trial judge erroneously ordered a consecutive sentence between the felony-firearm sentence and the second-degree home invasion sentence because the home invasion conviction was not the predicate offense.

BB 259018:  The order of restitution granting compensation where there is nothing in the record to support either the actual loss or Defendant’s obligation to pay restitution to the designated individual is invalid.

BB 259573:  Defendant was sentenced on the basis of inaccurate information and in violation of Due Process where certain variables were incorrectly scored; he is entitled to resentencing, US Const, Ams V, XIV; Const 1963, art 1, § 17.

BB 259395:  Defendant, convicted of a first-degree murder committed when he was under the age of 18, is entitled to a jury determination of any/all facts that expose him to a life without parole sentence, which is a departure from the default term of years sentence.

BB 259404:  The trial court violated appellant’s due process rights by denying a motion for separate juries where appellant and the co-defendant each raised the defense that the other caused the fatal crash.

BB 259404:  The trial court violated appellant’s due process confrontation rights by permitting a responding officer to testify to statements made at the crash scene by alleged eyewitnesses who did not appear at trial and who defense trial counsel did not previously have an opportunity to cross-examine; alternatively, defense trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective in failing to properly object.

BB 259572:  The trial court violated Defendant’s Due Process rights by allowing the prosecutor to introduce 404b evidence that was not discovered or disclosed until after jury selection, opening statements and two days of trial.

BB 259772:  Defendant’s Due Process rights were violated where the trial judge threatened the prosecution witness that he could be charged with perjury and could spend the rest of his life in prison after the witness denied seeing Defendant shoot the complainant, which coerced the witness to recant his direct testimony and identify Defendant as the shooter, or, in the alternative, Defendant was denied his Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel where his trial attorney failed to object to the trial  judge’s statements.

BB 259782:  Defendant is entitled to be resentenced where the judge was operating under a mistake of law and/or inaccurate information at sentencing, i.e. that the statutory sentencing guidelines scheme was constitutional and binding.  His sentence is invalid.

BB 259824:  Defendant was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel by his attorney’s argument that the trial judge should find defendant guilty of a lesser degree of assault, never argued that there was a reasonable doubt as to Defendant’s guilt due to the highly questionable identification testimony, and suggested to the judge that Defendant’s testimony was false.

BB 259923:  Defendant proved that he had both immunity and a valid affirmative defense under sections four and eight of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act and the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss.

BB 259954:  Defendant’s Sixth Amendment right of confrontation was denied when inadmissible hearsay statements by non-testifying witnesses were admitted against him; counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the police recordings.

BB 259954:  Defendant was denied a fair trial by the introduction of his involuntary statement after his involuntary waiver and by the failure to scrupulously honor his former invocation of the right to remain silent; he was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel by his attorney’s failure to move to suppress his statement.

BB 259954:  The trial court denied defendant a fair trial by admitting, over objection, evidence that defendant had been released from prison a few days before the offense.