People of Michigan v. Christopher Duran Head
323 Mich. App. 526
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2018Background
- Defendant's 10-year-old daughter TH fatally shot his 9-year-old son DH with a loaded short-barreled shotgun kept in an unlocked closet in defendant's bedroom.
- Defendant was a convicted felon in illegal possession of the short-barreled shotgun.
- Children had unsupervised access to the bedroom; TH retrieved the gun and accidentally fired it while imitating a video game.
- Defendant was charged and convicted by a jury of involuntary manslaughter, second-degree child abuse, felon in possession of a firearm, possession of a short-barreled shotgun, and felony-firearm.
- The trial court admitted gruesome photographs of the victim; defendant challenged jury instructions and habitual-offender notice procedure at sentencing.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed all convictions and sentences, holding evidence sufficient, instructions and admission of photos proper, and habitual-offender notice error harmless.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for involuntary manslaughter | Evidence showed gross negligence in storing a loaded, accessible gun where children played unsupervised; TH's shooting was a foreseeable result | Argued insufficient proof of gross negligence and causation; TH's act was intervening | Affirmed: evidence supported gross negligence and both factual and proximate causation |
| Sufficiency for second-degree child abuse | Defendant committed reckless and knowingly dangerous acts by storing a loaded short-barreled shotgun accessible to children, causing serious harm | Argued no affirmative reckless act—only inaction | Affirmed: storage + allowing unsupervised access constituted reckless/knowing dangerous acts causing death |
| Jury instruction on involuntary manslaughter | Instructions followed pattern and required proof beyond a reasonable doubt | Argued instruction effectively directed a verdict on causation; counsel ineffective for not objecting | Waived by counsel's approval; alternatively, no plain error and counsel not ineffective because objection would be meritless |
| Admission of gruesome photographs | Photos were relevant to cause of death and to show severity supporting mental-state elements; probative value outweighed prejudice | Argued undue prejudice under MRE 403 | Affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion; photos corroborated testimony and grievousness alone doesn't require exclusion |
| Habitual-offender notice/proof of service | Notice requirement satisfied in substance; defendant had actual notice and no prejudice | Argued prosecutor failed to file proof of service and original information unsigned; lacked notice of 25-year mandatory minimum | Harmless error: defendant had actual notice on record, was informed pretrial and at plea discussions; no prejudice shown |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Odom, 276 Mich. App. 407 (discussing sufficiency review)
- People v Feezel, 486 Mich. 184 (gross negligence, proximate causation)
- People v McCoy, 223 Mich. App. 500 (elements of gross negligence)
- People v Tims, 449 Mich. 83 (causation element in homicide)
- People v Kowalski, 489 Mich. 488 (waiver by approving jury instructions)
- People v Carines, 460 Mich. 750 (plain-error standard)
- People v Gayheart, 285 Mich. App. 202 (admissibility of photographs; probative v. prejudicial)
- People v Mills, 450 Mich. 61 (MRE 403 and gruesome photographs admissibility)