Opinion
363865
02-03-2023
People of Michigan v. Antonio Deshawn Richards
LC No. 19-009830-01-FC
Kirsten Frank Kelly Presiding Judge Thomas C. Cameron Anica Letica Judges
ORDER
Pursuant to MCR 7.205(E)(2), in lieu of granting the application, the trial court's October 28, 2022 order granting defendant's motion to exclude testimony is REVERSED. A trial court's decision on an evidentiary question is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. People v Danto, 294 Mich.App. 596, 598599; 822 N.W.2d 600 (2011). "A trial court abuses its discretion when its decision falls outside the range of principled outcomes." Id. The trial court concluded that the officers' proposed testimony regarding defendant's appearance in video footage, from an encounter that took place before the charged offenses were committed (and thus does not depict defendant committing any charged offenses) was inadmissible because it would invade the province of the jury to allow the officers to identify defendant in the footage. However, in this case, the purpose of the officers' testimony would not simply be to identify defendant for the jury, but rather, to explain how defendant became a suspect in the investigation, which then led to his eventual identification in a photographic array by a witness. Under the facts of this case, the testimony is admissible under MRE 701. See People v Fomby, 300 Mich.App. 46; 831 N.W.2d 887 (2013) (identification testimony from a police officer is admissible under MRE 701, as lay opinion testimony, where the testimony is rationally based on the officer's perceptions, helpful to the jury, and does not invade the province of the jury in determining the defendant's guilt or innocence). The trial court abused its discretion by holding otherwise.
This order is to have immediate effect. MCR 7.215(F)(2). We do not retain jurisdiction.