Opinion
362193
03-15-2023
People of Michigan v. Jason Anthony Ryan
LC No. 14-003643-FC
Brock A. Swartzle Presiding Judge Stephen L. Borrello Michelle M. Rick Judges
ORDER
The application for leave to appeal is DENIED because defendant has failed to establish that the trial court erred in denying the motion for relief from judgment.
Rick, J., would grant the application and states: MCR 6.502(G) permits successive motions based on new evidence and claims of actual innocence. Another person (Peterson) confessed to the crimes that defendant was convicted of committing. Peterson was convicted of raping and killing the victim. Defendant has asserted a viable innocence claim and he raised issues related to new evidence as defined by MCR 6.502(G)(3). Defendant attached to the instant Motion for Relief from Judgment (1) a declaration from a forensic scientist attesting his perceived fundamental deficiencies in the prosecution's DNA evidence; (2) an affidavit from a retired long-time homicide investigator asserting the exculpatory significance of a condom found at the crime scene tested for DNA that did not match defendant; (3) an offer of proof alleging questionable controls at the State Crime Laboratory during a time period relevant to defendant's case, and (4) allegations of a personal relationship of a key prosecution witness to officials involved in defendant's prosecution (not previously known to the defendant), which purportedly contradicts prosecution claims. This evidence, coupled with the fact that defendant's first trial resulted in a hung jury and the subsequent jury that convicted defendant was unaware of Peterson's confession, supports defendant's request for relief.