People of Michigan v. Evan Michael Morich
332970
| Mich. Ct. App. | Oct 12, 2017Background
- Defendant (Morich) and victim (Melcer) knew each other from community mental health; Melcer has seizures and uses a cane and cannot drive.
- On Aug. 6, 2015, Werner (defendant’s girlfriend) drove to Detroit with defendant to get drugs; defendant told Werner he intended to rob Melcer and took clothing and what she believed was a shotgun.
- Werner left Melcer alone at her home; on return a masked man (identified by Melcer as defendant) entered, produced a long gun, struck and threatened Melcer, tied and held him in a basement, and stole medications and $1,150.
- Melcer identified the weapon as a shotgun and the brand by experience as a hunter; Werner corroborated that defendant brought a long, black gun from Detroit.
- Defendant was convicted by jury of armed robbery, unlawful imprisonment, felon in possession of a firearm, and felony-firearm. He appealed sufficiency of firearm evidence and several offense-variable (OV) score challenges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence that weapon was a "firearm" for felony-firearm and felon-in-possession | Victim testimony and corroboration support that the weapon was a shotgun | No gun was recovered; victim’s identification was speculative and could have been a gas/BB/air gun | Evidence sufficient; victim’s close-up observations and Werner’s testimony support firearm finding |
| Scoring OV 1 (aggravated use of a weapon) and OV 2 (lethal potential) | Victim testified defendant pointed/used a shotgun; shotgun qualifies under OV statutes | Improper because no proof of an actual firearm | Court affirmed scoring: shotgun use supported 15 pts (OV1) and 5 pts (OV2) |
| Scoring OV 4 (psychological injury) | Victim reported shattered sense of security and continuing mental-health treatment addressing new issues | Defendant argued victim’s ongoing treatment predated the offense so scoring was improper | 10 points affirmed: record showed serious psychological injury requiring professional treatment |
| Scoring OV 8 (asportation/captivity) and OV 10 (exploitation of vulnerable victim/predatory conduct) | Moving victim to basement, isolating him, and preoffense planning (obtaining gun, waiting till victim was alone) show asportation and predation | Argued lack of predatory, preoffense conduct directed at victim for primary purpose of victimization | Court affirmed 15 pts for OV8 (moved to secluded basement) and 15 pts for OV10 (preoffense conduct and knowing victim was vulnerable) |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Wolfe, 440 Mich. 508 (de novo review of sufficiency of evidence)
- People v Lemmon, 456 Mich. 625 (credibility and jury determinations)
- People v Chelmicki, 305 Mich. App. 58 (definition of asportation to greater danger)
- People v Kosik, 303 Mich. App. 146 (predatory conduct standard for OV 10)
- People v Huston, 489 Mich. 451 (predatory conduct discussion)
- People v Cannon, 481 Mich. 152 (de novo review of sentencing statute interpretation)
- People v Hardy, 494 Mich. 430 (clear-error standard for sentencing factfinding)
- People v Kimble, 470 Mich. 305 (plain-error review standard)
- People v Sours, 315 Mich. App. 346 (preservation of sentencing objections)