People of Michigan v. Saul Arturo Mejia

Order Michigan Supreme Court
Lansing, Michigan
January 24, 2020 Bridget M. McCormack,
Chief Justice
159422 David F. Viviano,
Chief Justice Pro Tem
Stephen J. Markman
Brian K. Zahra
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Richard H. Bernstein
Plaintiff-Appellee, Elizabeth T. Clement
Megan K. Cavanagh,
Justices
v SC: 159422
COA: 339426
Berrien CC: 2016-016334-FC
SAUL ARTURO MEJIA,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________/
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 14, 2019
judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not
persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
MCCORMACK, C.J. (dissenting.)
I respectfully dissent from the Court’s decision to deny leave to appeal. I would
grant leave to appeal to further review the defendant’s argument that both the question of
the admissibility of child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome (CSAAS) under Daubert
v Merrell Dow Pharm, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and this Court’s decision allowing the
admission of such evidence, People v Peterson, 450 Mich. 349 (1995), are ripe for
reconsideration. While I recognize that the majority of courts currently admit such
evidence, recently courts around the country nonetheless have been grappling with
troubling questions about the validity and reliability of such evidence. See, e.g., State v
JLG, 234 NJ 265, 272 (2018) (concluding that, for the most part, “it is no longer possible
to conclude that CSAAS has a sufficiently reliable basis in science to be the subject of
expert testimony” and therefore holding that “expert testimony about CSAAS in general,
and its component behaviors other than delayed disclosure, may no longer be admitted at
criminal trials”); see also King v Commonwealth, 472 S.W.3d 523, 530 (Ky, 2015)
(concluding that “[t]he validity of the theory was not self-evident in 1985 and it is not self-
evident today”). And as the New Jersey Supreme Court noted in JLG, 234 NJ at 291-292,
“CSAAS is not recognized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
and has not been accepted by the American Psychiatric Association, the
2
American Psychological Association, or the American Psychological Society.” I think it
is important for this Court to join that conversation.
BERNSTEIN and CAVANAGH, JJ., join the statement of MCCORMACK, C.J.
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.
January 24, 2020
s0121
Clerk