RECENT AND NOTABLE RESULTS
People v R.G.
Macomb Circuit Court, 2020
R.G. was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-I) based on his 7-year-old niece’s allegation that he had sexually assaulted her when she was 4 years old. He was sentenced to a mandatory minimum of 25 years in prison, effectively a life sentence given his age.
As R.G.’s appellate counsel, I scrutinized the niece’s disclosure, i.e., when she first reported the assault. The disclosure came after highly suggestive questioning by the niece’s older sister, who was not a fan of R.G. I enlisted the help of an expert psychologist, who authored a damning report chronicling the problems with the older sister’s questioning and how it could have provoked a false memory for a 7-year-old. I argued that R.G.’s trial counsel was ineffective by not presenting such an expert at trial. The judge agreed and reversed R.G.’s conviction and vacated his 25-year sentence.
People v McKinney
Wexford Circuit Court, 2020
Mr. McKinney was convicted of possession of methamphetamine at a jury trial. He was sentenced to 46 months to 20 years in prison. At trial, the prosecution introduced inculpatory statements that Mr. McKinney had made after police gave him the Miranda warnings. On appeal, I discovered that the police had omitted important parts of the Miranda warnings. Consequently, I argued, those statements should not have been admitted at trial. The trial court judge agreed and reversed Mr. McKinney’s conviction and vacated his sentence.
People v Denson
Michigan Supreme Court 2017
Mr. Denson was convicted of assaulting a young man he found with his teenage daughter in her bedroom. Mr. Denson testified that the man had been trying to sexually assault his daughter and that he had intervened to save her. At trial, the prosecutor introduced highly inflammatory character evidence against Mr. Denson, falsely painting him as a violent man. I prepared Mr. Denson’s brief in the Michigan Supreme Court, which reversed Mr. Denson’s conviction in a landmark opinion limiting prosecutors’ ability to introduce character evidence against defendants.
Click here to read the opinion.
People v Alexander
Michigan Supreme Court, 2017
Mr. Alexander was convicted of sexually assaulting his stepdaughter. After trial, cell phone records were discovered that contradicted a key point of the stepdaughter’s story. The trial court judge granted a new trial based on the records. But the prosecutor appealed, and the Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and reinstated Mr. Alexander’s convictions.
That’s where I stepped in. Joined by co-counsel, I petitioned the Michigan Supreme Court, arguing that the Court of Appeals’ decision should be overturned. The Supreme Court agreed and sent the case back to the trial court judge. I then prepared a motion for new trial, which the trial court granted. The prosecutor later dismissed all charges against Mr. Alexander. He remains a free man today.
Abner Hines
Life without parole sentence commuted by governor, 2018
On the night of February 18, 1974, Mr. Hines and his friends robbed a party store. After the robbery was finished and everyone was out of the store, one of the friends went back in and shot and killed the store owner. Mr. Hines had never intended for anyone to get hurt, let alone killed. Nevertheless, under the law as it existed at that time, Mr. Hines was on the hook as if he had pulled the trigger himself. He was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole for first-degree felony murder.
In 2017, I helped Mr. Hines apply for a commutation of sentence. Our petition outlined the great strides that Mr. Hines had made during his 40+ years of incarceration and why he deserved a second chance. On December 21, 2018, the Friday before Christmas, Governor Rick Snyder granted the petition and commuted Mr. Hines’s sentence. I was there to greet Mr. Hines when he walked out of prison on March 26, 2019.
Tim with Mr. Hines on his first day of freedom in nearly 45 years.
People v Warner
Michigan Court of Appeals, 2019
Mr. Warner was convicted of second-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-II) after his stepdaughter accused him of sexually assaulting her. On appeal, I discovered a significant error in the instructions that the trial court judge gave to the jury, an error that Mr. Warner’s trial attorney had missed. The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed Mr. Warner’s conviction and ordered a new trial.
Click here to read the opinion.
People v DeBruyne
Michigan Court of Appeals, 2019
Mr. DeBruyne is charged with operating while intoxicated causing death based on a 2017 motorcycle accident. I filed a motion to throw out the blood alcohol test that police had conducted, arguing that the police had violated Mr. DeBruyne’s Fourth Amendment rights. The circuit court denied the motion, and the Michigan Court of Appeals initially declined to even hear an appeal. But I appealed to the Michigan Supreme Court, which sent the case back to the Michigan Court of Appeals, forcing that court to hear the appeal. In a 3-0 decision, the Michigan Court of Appeals agreed that the blood alcohol test should be thrown out because Mr. DeBruyne’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated.
Click here to read the opinion.
People v T.K.
Michigan Court of Appeals, 2019
T.K. was convicted at trial of perjury. The prosecution alleged that he had lied under oath at a civil hearing. At issue was whether T.K. had a particular red trailer on his property during a specific period of time. The only significant evidence proving the charge was a neutral witness who testified that he had in fact seen the trailer at T.K.’s house during the relevant period.
On appeal, I presented photographic evidence demonstrating that the witness had misidentified the trailer. I alleged ineffective assistance of counsel based on the failure of T.K.’s trial attorney to present the photographs at trial. The Court of Appeals agreed that the photographs were significant evidence of T.K.’s innocence and remanded the case for a Ginther hearing.
People v K.H.
Michigan Court of Appeals, 2019
K.H. was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and other related offenses premised on the alleged sexual abuse of his stepdaughter. The circuit court judge sentenced K.H. to a minimum of 30 years in prison, more than 6 years above the sentencing guidelines range. I appealed to the Michigan Court of Appeals, which ruled that the circuit court judge had not properly justified the 6+ year departure. The Court of Appeals accordingly sent the case back to the circuit court for a new sentencing hearing. The prosecutor has applied for an appeal in the Michigan Supreme Court, which remains pending.
In re Parole of Layman
Michigan Court of Appeals, 2018
After serving 20 years of an 8-to-30-year sentence for criminal sexual conduct, the Parole Board granted Mr. Layman parole. But the county prosecutor appealed, and the circuit court revoked Mr. Layman’s parole, meaning that he would have to stay in prison.
Joined by co-counsel, I took over from there. The Michigan Court of Appeals initially refused to hear our appeal. But after I petitioned the Michigan Supreme Court, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the Court of Appeals, forcing them to hear the appeal. The Court of Appeals then reinstated Mr. Layman’s parole. He is now a free man.
Click here to read the opinion.
People v C.D.
Midland Circuit Court, 2019
C.D. was originally sentenced to 10 years for manufacture of methamphetamine. After diligent investigation—including digging up records from one of C.D.’s previous cases—I discovered substantial errors in C.D.’s sentencing guidelines. The circuit court judge granted my motion for resentencing. At the resentencing hearing, the judge reduced C.D.’s sentence by a little more than 2 years, a 20% reduction.
People v J.L.
Wayne Circuit Court, 2019
J.L. was convicted of third-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-III) in 1998. He was 18 years old at the time, and the complainant was 14. Court documents from 1998 showed that J.L. had maintained that he and the complainant had consensual sex. The complainant, though, had claimed that J.L. coerced her. J.L. was required to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
Under a 2011 amendment to the sex offender registry law, J.L. was eligible to be removed from the registry if he could prove that the sex with the complainant had been consensual. I hired a private investigator. After the investigator contacted the complainant’s family, it became clear that J.L. had been telling the truth in 1998. He also passed a polygraph examination with flying colors, which I was able to introduce into the record. In 2019, a circuit court judge granted my petition to permanently remove J.L. from the sex offender registry.
