People of Michigan v. Brian Michael Alexander, 332700

Defendant (Brian Alexander) was convicted by a jury of four counts of second-degree criminal sexual conduct involving his stepdaughter (victim aged 13–15).
Victim testified to multiple incidents of inappropriate contact (rubbing over clothes, hand inside pants once); defendant denied the allegations.
At the preliminary exam the victim said she missed school the day of one incident; at trial she equivocated and acknowledged she may not have missed school and that she wasn’t sure about texts/calls with her mother that day.
After conviction, defendant moved for a new trial based on newly discovered telephone records he claimed showed no text messages between the victim and her mother during the relevant period and therefore impeached the victim’s trial testimony.
The trial court granted a new trial, reasoning the records could have materially affected the jury’s assessment of the victim’s credibility in a case that was essentially a credibility contest.
The Court of Appeals reversed, finding the telephone records were cumulative, did not establish perjury, and the trial court applied the wrong standard (possibility rather than probability) in granting a new trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a new trial was warranted based on newly discovered telephone records	The prosecutor argued the trial court abused its discretion in granting a new trial	Alexander argued the records were newly discovered impeachment evidence that would likely produce a different result on retrial	Reversed: records were cumulative, did not prove perjury, and would not make a different result probable
Whether the trial court applied the correct legal standard for newly discovered evidence	Prosecutor contended the court improperly relied on mere possibility	Defendant relied on trial court’s view that records could have created reasonable doubt	Court held the trial court applied an incorrect (possibility) standard rather than the required probability standard and thus erred legally
Whether the telephone records were noncumulative and discoverable with reasonable diligence	Prosecutor noted mother had already testified she received no texts; trial record included school records and prior testimony	Defendant maintained the records were not presented at trial and would have impeached the victim’s testimony	Court concluded the records were cumulative to existing testimony and trial evidence and thus did not satisfy Cress requirements

People v Terrell, 289 Mich. App. 553 (discusses abuse of discretion review)
People v Cress, 468 Mich. 678 (sets four-part test for new trial based on newly discovered evidence)
People v Grissom, 492 Mich. 296 (explains standard for newly discovered impeachment evidence)
People v Duncan, 494 Mich. 713 (states a trial court abuses discretion when it applies incorrect legal standard)