People of Michigan v. Alvin Perry Jordan
328474
| Mich. Ct. App. | Mar 7, 2017Background
- Jordan was convicted by a jury of first-degree premeditated murder, first-degree felony murder, armed robbery, and felony-firearm, with life without parole for the murders and 15 years to life for robbery, consecutive to a 2-year felony-firearm term; convictions arise from the December 29, 2014 shooting death during a drug sale.
- Will Wright was killed after Wright sold narcotics to Tanzania Corbin; Wright was shot as he attempted to exit a building following the sale; witnesses described a struggle over a gun, with the gun later not found in Wright’s hands.
- Corbin and Lemons testified Wright was unarmed; blood on a sweatshirt found in Corbin’s apartment matched Wright; Wright’s blood DNA implicated in fingernail DNA evidence.
- Counsel argued against premeditation and for potential self-defense; the court rejected self-defense as a viable basis given the evidence and strategy; the court also noted the two murder convictions violate double jeopardy when tied to one victim.
- The court remanded for resentencing on the armed-robbery conviction due to an improper life-without-parole sentence with a minimum term included in the same sentence, and for correction to specify a single first-degree murder conviction supported by two theories; convictions otherwise affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Self-defense instruction preserved challenge | People argues trial strategy supported premeditation/felony-murder theory | Jordan contends defense counsel should have requested a self-defense instruction | No error; strategy reasonable; insufficient evidence to support self-defense; prejudice not shown. |
| Constitutionality of life-without-parole for 18-year-old offender | State argues Miller does not extend to 18-year-olds | Jordan contends Eighth Amendment prohibits mandatory LWOP for those under 18 | Miller not extended to 18-year-olds; trial court did not violate Eighth Amendment; remanded to correct judgment for single murder conviction. |
| Double jeopardy—two first-degree murder convictions | Two murders against one victim | Two convictions arise from same homicide | Remand to specify a single first-degree-murder conviction supported by two theories. |
| Admissibility and verdict-form issues | Evidence admitted (cell-phone photos, sweatshirt) improperly obtained; appeal on verdict form | Counsel ineffective for suppression issues; jury form defective | plain-error review; evidence affirmed as admissible; sweatshirt admissible under consent; verdict form adequate; no reversal for these issues. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Long, 246 Mich App 582 (2001) (double jeopardy concerns re multiple punishments for one homicide)
- People v Bigelow, 229 Mich App 218 (1998) (remedies for multiple first-degree murder convictions)
- People v Carines, 460 Mich 750 (1999) (plain-error standard for unpreserved claims)
- People v Moorer, 262 Mich App 64 (2004) (counsel not required to raise meritless issues; ineffective-assistance defenses limited)
- Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012) (mandatory LWOP for juveniles violates Eighth Amendment)
- Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473 (2014) (no warrantless access to cell phone content without exception)