People of Michigan v. Edward Lamar Troy
329525
Mich. Ct. App.Feb 23, 2017Background
- Detroit narcotics team executed a search warrant at 8208 Mansfield; officers found an assault rifle, a handgun, and small amounts of cocaine and marijuana in a northeast bedroom. Defendant was in or exiting that bedroom and matched a suspect description.
- Defendant (Troy) was tried and convicted by jury of felony-firearm (second offense) and felon-in-possession; sentenced as a fourth habitual offender (consecutive five years for felony-firearm and 6–60 months for felon-in-possession).
- Defense theory focused on lack of proof that Troy resided at Mansfield (arguing only constructive possession) and attacked police credibility regarding the warrant.
- Pretrial, defense counsel repeatedly clashed with Judge Talon, was held in contempt twice, briefly removed from proceedings, and later moved to disqualify the judge; an evidentiary suppression hearing was ultimately held before a different judge.
- Trial court denied Troy’s suppression motion for lack of standing to challenge the search; Troy appealed, raising ineffective assistance, suppression/probable cause, and double jeopardy claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Counsel’s representation was reasonable; prosecution prevailed | Troy: counsel failed to move for directed verdict, inadequately investigated, refused to let Troy testify, skipped calling key witnesses (Quiana), and engaged in unprofessional pretrial conduct harming defense | Court: Most criticisms lacked record support; counsel did move for directed verdict; strategic decisions (witnesses, residence proof) were reasonable; pretrial misconduct was objectively unreasonable but did not prejudice outcome — no relief |
| Standing / Motion to suppress | Warrant affidavit insufficient for probable cause; suppression should be granted | Troy: lacked legitimate expectation of privacy in Mansfield and failed to establish standing at suppression hearing | Court: Troy failed to prove standing (was handyman/manager who had to give notice and lived elsewhere); because no standing, probable-cause challenge need not be reached — suppression denial affirmed |
| Probable cause for search warrant | Warrants lacked timely corroboration to show contraband would be at residence | Troy: argued affidavit did not establish present probable cause | Court: Court did not rule on probable cause because standing lacking; issue not preserved on appeal and moot given standing ruling |
| Double jeopardy (multiple punishments) | Troy: convicting/sentencing under both felon-in-possession and felony-firearm punishes same offense | State: Legislature authorized cumulative punishments here; statutory scheme permits both convictions | Court: No double jeopardy violation — Legislature clearly intended cumulative punishment; Calloway/Dillard control; Blockburger test not controlling where legislative intent is clear |
Key Cases Cited
- Jordan v. People, 275 Mich. App. 659 (fact-law mixed questions; standard of review)
- Vaughn v. People, 491 Mich. 642 (ineffective-assistance Strickland framework)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (constitutional ineffective-assistance standard)
- Carbin v. People, 463 Mich. 590 (defendant’s burden to establish factual predicate for IAC)
- Collins v. People, 298 Mich. App. 458 (structural error and right to counsel at critical stages)
- Calloway v. People, 469 Mich. 448 (Legislature’s intent permits cumulative felony-firearm and felon-in-possession punishments)
- Dillard v. People, 246 Mich. App. 163 (same holding as Calloway re: double punishment)
- Smith v. People, 478 Mich. 292 (Blockburger elements test applies absent clear legislative intent)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (same-elements test for double jeopardy)
- Flick v. People, 487 Mich. 1 (definition of constructive possession)