People of Michigan v. Brian Michael Alexander ( 2017 )


Menu:
  • Order                                                                                        Michigan Supreme Court
    Lansing, Michigan
    June 21, 2017                                                                                        Stephen J. Markman,
    Chief Justice
    Brian K. Zahra
    Bridget M. McCormack
    154857                                                                                                  David F. Viviano
    Richard H. Bernstein
    Joan L. Larsen
    Kurtis T. Wilder,
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,                                                                                    Justices
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v                                                                 SC: 154857
    COA: 332700
    Ingham CC: 15-000175-FH
    BRIAN MICHAEL ALEXANDER,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    ________________________________________/
    On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 6, 2016
    judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in
    lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE that part of the Court of Appeals judgment
    that reversed the Ingham Circuit Court’s November 20, 2015 order granting the
    defendant’s motion for a new trial. Although the Court of Appeals correctly concluded
    that the trial court applied an improper standard in granting a new trial based on newly
    discovered evidence, it erred in further determining that the new evidence would not
    justify the grant of a new trial. The evidence – the discovery of the complainant’s cell
    phone records – was newly discovered, was not cumulative, and could not have been
    discovered with reasonable diligence and produced at trial. Whether this evidence
    “makes a different result probable on retrial,” People v Cress, 
    468 Mich. 678
    , 692 (2003),
    should first be determined by the trial court. We REMAND this case to the Ingham
    Circuit Court to determine, applying the Cress standard, whether the newly discovered
    evidence justifies a new trial.
    We do not retain jurisdiction.
    I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
    foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
    June 21, 2017
    a0614
    Clerk
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 154857

Filed Date: 6/21/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/23/2017