For our subscribers

Subscribers to the Criminal Defense Resource Center’s online resources, found at, have access to more than 1,800 appellate pleadings filed by SADO Attorneys in the last five years.  The brief bank is updated regularly and is open to anyone who wants to subscribe to online access.  On our site, briefs are searchable by keyword, results can be organized by relevance or date, and the pleadings can be filtered by court of filing.  Below are some of the issues presented in briefs added to our brief bank in the last few weeks. For confidentiality purposes, names of clients and witnesses have been removed.
COA 359985
Defendant’s convictions must be vacated and the charges dismissed with prejudice because the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss for violations of the interstate agreement on detainers.

COA 360345
The trial court failed its role as gatekeeper under Daubert and MRE 702 by admitting time-of-death evidence based on a novel method of interpreting pacemaker data that is virtually untested, relies on two studies of limited value with equivocal results, has a concededly unknown error rate, and possibly had an error in this case where certain testing was not performed. Defendant was denied his state and federal constitutional right to due process.

COA 361129
The Double Jeopardy Clauses of both the United States and Michigan constitutions barred defendant’s second trial because the prosecutor goaded a mistrial.

COA 363875
Defendant’s federal and state constitutional rights to confront the witnesses against him were violated when the trial court prohibited trial counsel from questioning the state’s witness about his status on probation at the time of the incident, which incentivized the witness to deny that drugs and alcohol were present the night of the incident, and to testify favorably for the prosecutor.

COA 364894
The trial court erred in admitting, over defense objection, testimony from a witness regarding previous iTunes purchases allegedly made by defendant. The evidence was irrelevant, constituted prior bad acts evidence that did not meet a required purpose, and was substantially more prejudicial than probative.

COA 364904
The trial court misapplied MRE 804(b)(1) and deprived defendant of his constitutional right to present a defense by refusing to admit a witness’s full testimony from her plea hearing, which was elicited by the prosecutor for the
purpose of gathering evidence to be used against defendant.

COA 365590
Defendant’s right to a speedy trial was violated when he languished in jail for over 18 months waiting for trial and sentence. None of the delays are directly attributable to defendant. Defendant did not waive his right to a speedy trial by pleading no contest to the charge because a violation of his speedy trial right is jurisdictional. This Court should dismiss defendant’s R&O conviction with prejudice.

John Zevalking
Associate Editor