People of Michigan v. Dorian Lamarr Price
330710
| Mich. Ct. App. | Jun 1, 2017Background
- On Sept. 29, 2014, Clyde Beauchamp was shot in Detroit; defendant Dorian Price was tried in a bench trial and convicted of AWIGBH, felonious assault, carrying a concealed weapon, felony-firearm (second offense), and felon-in-possession.
- Prosecutor failed to introduce evidence of defendant’s prior felony during the prosecution’s case-in-chief; defendant later testified about his criminal history.
- Defense later argued trial counsel was ineffective for not moving for a directed verdict on the felon-in-possession charge after the prosecution rested.
- Defendant also contended the trial court’s convictions for both AWIGBH and felonious assault were inconsistent and that convicting him of both violated double jeopardy (multiple punishments).
- The trial court sentenced Price as a fourth habitual offender to concurrent and consecutive terms; this appeal followed and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for not moving for directed verdict on felon-in-possession after prosecution rested | Prosecution argued evidence could be reopened and verdict would stand | Price argued counsel’s failure let him testify and supply the missing prior-felony proof, causing prejudice | No ineffective assistance: defendant failed to show reasonable probability of a different outcome because court could have reserved ruling or allowed prosecution to reopen proofs to fix oversight |
| Inconsistent verdicts (AWIGBH and felonious assault) | Court: convictions must be reconcilable with factual findings | Price argued felonious assault requires no intent to do great bodily harm, conflicting with AWIGBH intent element | No reversible inconsistency: judge’s factual findings (weapon + intent) reconcile both convictions; no plain error |
| Double jeopardy (multiple punishments) | Prosecution relied on same-elements/Blockburger analysis showing distinct elements | Price argued both convictions punish same conduct (intent overlap) | No double jeopardy violation: AWIGBH and felonious assault have different elements under Blockburger; convictions may stand |
| Reopening proofs to supply prior-felony evidence | Prosecution: court may reopen to prevent undue prejudice; oversight excusable | Defense: failure to move for directed verdict should have prevented introduction of prior felony later | Court noted reopening is discretionary and likely permissive here; absence of prejudice undermines ineffective-assistance claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (same-elements test for double jeopardy)
- People v. Doss, 406 Mich. 90 (absence of an element is not an element that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt)
- People v. Ellis, 468 Mich. 25 (trial judge may not enter irreconcilable inconsistent verdicts)
- People v. Carbin, 463 Mich. 590 (prejudice/prong analysis for ineffective assistance)