From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Brown

Supreme Court of Michigan.
May 9, 2012
491 Mich. 914 (Mich. 2012)

Summary

In Brown, our Supreme Court reversed a decision of this Court finding that the defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of trial counsel or appellate counsel and affirming the trial court's denial of a motion for relief from judgment.

Summary of this case from People v. Armijo

Opinion

Docket No. 144298.COA No. 292470.

2012-05-9

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Stanley Jerome BROWN, Defendant–Appellant.


Prior report: Mich.App., 2011 WL 5108500.

Order

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 27, 2011 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE in part the judgment of the Court of Appeals and REMAND this case to the Wayne Circuit Court for a new trial. The trial court erred in concluding that the defendant received the effective assistance of trial counsel. Counsel was ineffective for failing to specifically request the National Counsel on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence staff activity logs before trial, as those logs supported the defendant's claim that he did not have as many individual counseling sessions with the complainants as they alleged. Trial counsel was also ineffective for failing to effectively cross-examine the sole complainant (the “complainant”) whose testimony resulted in the defendant's convictions. Counsel failed to point out any of the inconsistencies in the complainant's trial testimony, and also failed to develop the point that her trial testimony was inconsistent in some respects with her preliminary examination testimony and with her initial statement to the police. Because the defendant's former appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise these issues on the defendant's direct appeal, and the defendant was prejudiced thereby, he has met the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). On retrial, the defendant should be permitted to introduce relevant and admissible evidence produced in the civil suit filed on behalf of the complainant.

We do not retain jurisdiction.


Summaries of

People v. Brown

Supreme Court of Michigan.
May 9, 2012
491 Mich. 914 (Mich. 2012)

In Brown, our Supreme Court reversed a decision of this Court finding that the defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of trial counsel or appellate counsel and affirming the trial court's denial of a motion for relief from judgment.

Summary of this case from People v. Armijo
Case details for

People v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Stanley Jerome…

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan.

Date published: May 9, 2012

Citations

491 Mich. 914 (Mich. 2012)
811 N.W.2d 500

Citing Cases

People v. Armijo

Good cause warranting relief from judgment can be established by showing ineffective assistance of appellate…

People v. Trudeau

Unlike in Armstrong, the documentary evidence in question would not have directly contradicted the victim's…