People of Michigan v. Dominique Devonte McMillion
330128
| Mich. Ct. App. | Mar 16, 2017Background
- A 16-month-old child died after being left in Dominique McMillion’s care; autopsy revealed multiple severe injuries (brain hemorrhages, spinal/nerve/neck/pericardial bleeding, rib fracture, liver and pancreas lacerations).
- Before being left with McMillion the child had only minor issues (small facial bruise, hunger-related crying).
- Medical experts (Dr. Kesha, Dr. Mata-Angelocci) testified the injuries were concurrent, consistent with inflicted blunt-force trauma (shaking, throwing, kicking, punching), and inconsistent with accidental causes, CPR, choking, or seizures.
- McMillion conceded attempting CPR and claimed efforts were to save the child, arguing injuries were not intentional.
- Jury convicted McMillion of first-degree child abuse (MCL 750.136b(2)) and felony murder (MCL 750.316(1)(b)); McMillion appealed challenging sufficiency of intent and certain expert testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for first-degree child abuse (intent element) | Experts’ testimony and injury pattern permit inference McMillion intended or knew harm would occur | Actions were attempts to save child (CPR); no proof McMillion intended to cause serious harm | Evidence sufficient: jury could infer intent from nature/extent of injuries and expert opinions |
| Sufficiency for felony-murder conviction (underlying felony) | Underlying felony (first-degree child abuse) was proven, supporting felony murder | If child-abuse conviction fails, felony-murder fails too | Felony-murder conviction affirmed because child-abuse conviction was supported by sufficient evidence |
| Admissibility of medical examiner’s characterization as "inflicted trauma"/"beaten" | ME’s causal and descriptive opinions were relevant and within expertise | Such characterization invaded jury province and was prejudicial/legal conclusion | Admission not improper: ME did not testify to defendant’s guilt and explained basis for conclusions |
| Preservation of objection to ME testimony | N/A (prosecution) | Defense objected at trial as conjecture but appealed on invasion-of-jury-ground | Issue was unpreserved; reviewed for plain error and court found no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Bailey, 310 Mich. App. 703 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- People v. Gould, 225 Mich. App. 79 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997) (elements of first-degree child abuse)
- People v. Maynor, 470 Mich. 289 (Mich. 2004) ("knowingly or intentionally" requires intent to cause serious harm or knowledge that harm would result)
- People v. Kanaan, 278 Mich. App. 594 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008) (circumstantial evidence may establish intent)
- People v. Lane, 308 Mich. App. 38 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014) (circumstantial evidence and inferences)
- People v. Howard, 226 Mich. App. 528 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997) (nature and extent of injuries probative of intent)
- People v. Mills, 450 Mich. 61 (Mich. 1995) (authority on inferring intent from injury patterns)