People of Michigan v. Eric Anthony Harvey
329800
| Mich. Ct. App. | Mar 14, 2017Background
- Defendant Eric Harvey was convicted (after a second jury trial) of multiple counts of first- and second-degree criminal sexual conduct for repeatedly sexually abusing his stepdaughter RA from ages 11–17 and for involvement in her abortion at age 14.
- The first trial ended in a hung jury; the second trial produced the convictions and lengthy prison sentences as a second habitual offender.
- At the second trial defense counsel sought to question defendant’s sister, Kayla Foster, about whether RA had reported sexual activity with another male around the time of the pregnancy; the trial court barred that line of inquiry under Michigan’s rape-shield statute for lack of the required pretrial notice.
- Defense counsel did not object to admission of excerpts from RA’s diary; counsel used the diary during cross-examination and in closing to challenge RA’s credibility.
- Defendant raised on appeal (1) that excluding evidence of RA’s prior sexual conduct violated the rape-shield statute and his Sixth Amendment confrontation rights and (2) that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the diary and for not filing the rape-shield notice.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed: exclusion under the rape-shield statute was proper because defendant failed to give the required written offer of proof/notice, there was no adequate offer of proof to trigger constitutional inquiry, and ineffective-assistance claims failed on the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly excluded testimony about RA’s sexual history under MCL 750.520j(1)(b) because defendant failed to file the required notice | Prosecution: exclusion permissible under the rape-shield statute when defendant didn’t provide the written motion/offer of proof | Harvey: Kayla’s testimony about RA’s sex with another male was admissible to show source of pregnancy | Held: Exclusion proper; defendant failed to comply with notice requirement so court could bar the evidence |
| Whether exclusion violated defendant’s Sixth Amendment confrontation right | Prosecution: constitutional claim unpreserved and speculative absent offer of proof | Harvey: barring the testimony impeded his ability to confront and show another possible father | Held: Plain-error review fails because no offer of proof was made; without it, court wasn’t required to inquire further; no confrontation violation shown |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not objecting to admission of diary excerpts | Prosecution: counsel’s use of the diary to impeach RA was a plausible trial strategy | Harvey: counsel should have objected to hearsay / admission of the diary | Held: No ineffective assistance—failure to object was strategic and no reasonable probability of different outcome given corroborating evidence |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not filing rape-shield notice to admit evidence of alternative sexual partner | Prosecution: defendant failed to establish factual predicate because no offer of proof showed Kayla could give admissible testimony | Harvey: lack of notice denied potentially exculpatory evidence | Held: Claim fails—record lacks offer of proof and factual support; not ineffective assistance |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Burns, 494 Mich. 104 (review of evidentiary rulings; standard of review) (general evidentiary standard)
- People v. Adair, 452 Mich. 473 (rape-shield statute exceptions; pregnancy/source exception) (explains admissibility for origin of pregnancy)
- People v. Hackett, 421 Mich. 338 (constitutional confrontation and requirement of offer of proof) (defendant must make offer of proof before invoking confrontation right)
- People v. Arenda, 416 Mich. 1 (need for specific offer of proof; speculation insufficient) (offers of proof required to admit complainant’s sexual-history evidence)
- People v. Lucas (On Remand), 193 Mich. App. 298 (notice noncompliance can support exclusion; timing matters) (timing of disclosure weighed against defendant)
- People v. Carines, 460 Mich. 750 (plain-error standard for unpreserved constitutional claims) (standard applied to confrontation claim)
- People v. Ackerman, 257 Mich. App. 434 (ineffective-assistance test) (Strickland-type two-part test)
- People v. Petri, 279 Mich. App. 407 (deference to counsel’s trial strategy) (strong presumption counsel’s conduct was sound strategy)