Michigan Criminal Lawyers Blog

In November of 2011, Julie M. Maliszewski was convicted of larceny from a person. The conviction stemmed from an incident in July of 2010 when Maliszewski was at a friend’s home in Birch Run Township and allegedly stole jewelry worth thousands of dollars, although Maliszewski was deemed “mentally impaired” by appellate judges according to a news article at Mlive.com.

Maliszewski was initially sentenced to 18 months probation, however Saginaw County Circuit Judge Fred L. Borchard extended the probation to five years in September of 2012 due to Maliszewski’s non-payment of restitution.

Maliszewski argued several points in her appeal, including that Borchard erred in not allowing hearsay testimony from the alleged victim’s son, insufficient evidence for a conviction, and failure to grant a mistrial when a juror researched Wikipedia regarding corroborating evidence and reasonable doubt, then shared the findings with other jury members.

Appellate judges Joel Hoekstra, Henry Saad, and Mark Boonstra determined that the reading of the Wikipedia research results to the jury members did not warrant a reversal of Maliszewski’s larceny conviction.

After being informed of the Wikipedia search results, Borchard asked jurors whether they were capable of relying solely on the jury instructions that had been given them, and if they could disregard the search results. Borchard denied the motion for a mistrial after jurors said they could disregard the Wikipedia search results.

The appellate judges disagreed with all of the defendant’s arguments, and ruled that the judge’s decision to deny a mistrial did not impact the defendant’s ability to get a fair trial. The judges also found that jurors were properly instructed by Borchard both prior to and following the trial.

News reports state that Maliszewski will remain on probation until January 2017.

Michigan criminal appeals attorneys know that it is extremely difficult to have a conviction overturned, however the most important factor is having a capable lawyer who is thoroughly familiar and experienced with the process.

Continue reading

On Monday, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the convictions of a 23-year-old Saginaw man for his role in a shooting that occurred on Christmas day in 2010. Simmion Brown will continue to serve his 30-plus year sentence after the December 2011 verdict against Brown was upheld by appellate judges Christopher Murray, Jane Markey, and William Whitbeck.

According to news reports at Mlive.com, Brown shot 44-year-old Bobby J. Johnson Jr. on Christmas day in 2010 after he was offended because the intended victim would not give him a cigarette. Johnson survived after being shot in the arm and chest. Brown was convicted of assault with intent to murder. The incident occurred in Saginaw at Bridgton Place Townhomes.

In his appeal, Brown focused on his alibi defense, and the prosecution’s response to it; he also argued that the admission of three hearsay statements allowed by Circuit Judge Janet M. Boes was in err. During his trial, Brown’s cousin testified that when the shooting occurred, the defendant was at a family gathering. The prosecution then called Brown’s aunt to testify in response to the cousin’s allegations, and a police detective who rebutted the aunt’s testimony. Judges found that under the circumstances the prosecution could not impeach its own witness.

Regarding the hearsay statements, judges ruled that they were admitted properly under the “excited utterance” hearsay rule exemption. The statements included the victim himself telling his then-girlfriend that Brown shot him, telling his daughter while in the hospital that the defendant shot him, and a 911 recording in which Johnson is heard naming Brown as the shooter.

Brown was convicted on other charges as well, including three counts of possessing a firearm during the commission of a felony, possessing a firearm as a felon, and carrying a dangerous weapon with unlawful intent. He was ordered pay restitution to Johnson in the amount of $20,748.75 and sentenced to 32 to 52 years in prison.

As all Michigan criminal appeals attorneys know, having a conviction overturned is a challenge that is never easy. It is critical that the lawyer an individual chooses to represent him or her is thoroughly knowledgeable and experienced in the appeals process in order to obtain positive results.

Continue reading

Brittany R. Falconer, a 22-year-old former New Mexico woman convicted on 30 charges related to a South Side Saginaw murder plot in 2010, will continue to serve out her sentence of 22 to 47 years in prison after the Michigan Court of Appeals determined that a jury did not err in deciding that Falconer was not acting under duress during the incident.

Some of the charges prosecutors brought against Falconer include two counts of armed robbery, conspiring to commit armed robbery, torture, and carjacking. Falconer was also charged with conspiring to commit first-degree murder, however she was acquitted by a jury on that charge and three others.

In the 2010 plot, Dion Smith was apparently a victim of mistaken identity; two others who were involved with Falconer, Glenn Jett Jr. and Donald Anderson, burst from the back of a home where Falconer and Smith were; Falconer had allegedly invited Smith over for breakfast, which was a code to let Smith know to come over to see Falconer, who he had met the day before when he was outside his home with a 1975 burnt orange Chevrolet Impala. Falconer told Smith of her love for cars, and the two reportedly went for a ride and drank champagne.

After Anderson and Jett appeared from the back of the home to where Falconer had taken her shirt off, Smith was ordered into the bathroom where he was beaten and bound with zip ties, then threatened. The two men realized then that Smith was not the man they were looking for. They then decided to take his car, so he gave them the keys, according to Smith’s testimony.

Asa Smith, Dion Smith’s wife, and their two teen sons were assaulted and their home ransacked in the incident. Falconer testified that Glenn Jett Jr., who was her boyfriend at the time, threatened her to participate in Jett’s and Anderson’s plot, with Dion Smith as the intended victim.

The Michigan appeals court judges found that the evidence presented to the jury which led to Falconer being found guilty of voluntarily participating in the plot was sufficient. Dion Smith and his wife both testified in court that they believed Falconer was a willing participant in the plot.

In essence, Falconer’s role in the plot was one of seduction, and getting Smith to the home so that the two men could kill him; they then realized they had the wrong man.

Continue reading

On Wednesday April 3, Macomb County prosecutors were successful in winning a technical legal ruling with the state Court of Appeals regarding a fatal accident in which the driver of the vehicle allegedly had THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) in his body. Prosecutors hope this will help strengthen their case against 21-year-old Timothy Wilds, who is charged with operating a vehicle while under the influence of a controlled substance or while under the influence of any amount of a controlled substance, two theories which are considered 15-year felonies.

Brittany Nowicki, an 18-year-old Macomb Township woman, died when Wilds lost control of his Jeep while attempting to pass a vehicle on Plumbrook Road in snowy weather conditions. The Sterling Heights accident took place on December 10 of 2010 at approximate 6 a.m.. According to a news article at the Oakland Press, Nowicki was not wearing a seat belt; she died later at an area hospital after being ejected through the windshield of the Jeep during the crash.

Blood tests revealed that Wilds had two nanograms per milliliter, a minute amount, of THC in his system. THC is the primary ingredient in marijuana.

Prosecutors wanted the Michigan Court of Appeals to change the language used by the judge in instructing the jurors. Instead of the jury being told that prosecutors must only prove that the defendant “voluntarily decided to drive knowing that he had any amount of THC in his body,” the appeals court agreed that the judge would instruct that it must be proven that Wilds “voluntarily decided to drive after knowingly ingesting marijuana.”

While prosecutors won this technical legal ruling, the appeals court disagreed with another request by prosecutors, which was to add the language “The prosecution does not have the burden of proving that the defendant knew or should have known that he had the presence of THC within his body.” However, the Court of Appeals ruling does note that should the defense try to argue that the defendant did not believe his ability to drive would be affected by the marijuana, the language could be used.

Wilds’ defense attorney, James Maceroni, objected to Macomb Circuit Judge Edward Servitto’s refusal to allow a one-year misdemeanor option, moving violation causing death, to the jury. He attempted to appeal the judge’s decision in this matter, but the COA refused to address it.

Seasoned Michigan criminal appeals lawyers know that as in this case, it is sometimes necessary to appeal certain language used or other aspects of a criminal case in the process of trying to protect the client. Legal jargon is often difficult for the average person to understand; however an experienced attorney knows that these seemingly minor changes can make a huge difference in the outcome.

Continue reading