People of Michigan v. Emmanuel Leroy Brown
328737
| Mich. Ct. App. | Feb 21, 2017Background
- Defendant Emmanuel Brown was convicted by a jury of first-degree felony murder and torture for the death of Andre Buchanan; sentenced to life for murder and 30–60 years for torture.
- Defense sought triangulation/records of two cellular providers shortly before trial; one provider delayed production, and the trial court denied a continuance.
- Defense requested court-appointed video-analysis expert to challenge identification from a poor-quality gas-station video; court limited expert testimony to video quality, excluding identification opinion.
- Prosecution presented eyewitness identifications (Houston, Cartwright, Reimke), physical evidence (skull fractures, severe burns), and a gas purchase video; defense attacked witnesses’ credibility and raised alternative theories of cause of death.
- Defendant raised multiple appellate claims: denial of continuance, denial of appointed video expert, insufficiency of evidence for torture, suggestive pretrial IDs, juror false answers, ineffective assistance of counsel, and prosecutorial misconduct/discovery failures.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Continuance to obtain phone records | Denial was within trial court discretion and not prejudicial | Trial court abused discretion by denying continuance; records were needed for defense | Denial not an abuse of discretion; even if error, no prejudice given overwhelming evidence |
| Appointment of video-analysis expert | Court permissibly limited expert to video quality, not identification | Needed expert to identify that defendant was not the person in the video | No abuse: court appointed expert for technical issues but excluded identity opinion; expert not necessary to proceed |
| Sufficiency of evidence for torture conviction | Evidence (blunt-force skull fractures and severe burns) supported intent and great bodily injury | Evidence insufficient to prove intent to inflict cruel/extreme pain or great bodily injury | Conviction affirmed; jury could infer intent and great bodily injury from wounds and burns |
| Pretrial identification reliability (Wade) | IDs were not unduly suggestive; witnesses knew defendant and gave reasons for ID | Pretrial procedures created substantial likelihood of misidentification | Denial of suppression upheld; no substantial likelihood of misidentification based on record |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Steele, 283 Mich. App. 472 (continuance/adjournment review)
- People v. Coy, 258 Mich. App. 1 (continuance standards; good cause and diligence required)
- People v. Tanner, 469 Mich. 437 (appointment of experts for indigent defendants)
- People v. Nowack, 462 Mich. 392 (standard for sufficiency review)
- People v. Ericksen, 288 Mich. App. 192 (intent may be inferred from nature and location of wounds)
- People v. Kurylczyk, 443 Mich. 289 (factors for evaluating eyewitness ID reliability)
- Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (factors to assess likelihood of misidentification)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)