People of Michigan v. Gary Patrick Lewis
926 N.W.2d 579
Mich.2019Background
- Defendant (Lewis) was tried and convicted after a preliminary examination at which he was denied counsel.
- The Court of Appeals issued a published opinion on remand addressing whether denial of counsel at the preliminary examination was harmless error.
- The Michigan Supreme Court considered an application for leave to appeal the Court of Appeals' November 2, 2017 judgment and denied leave to appeal.
- Chief Justice McCormack concurred in the denial but wrote separately to identify perceived errors in the Court of Appeals' harmless-error analysis under Coleman v. Alabama.
- McCormack emphasized that conviction at trial does not automatically render deprivation of counsel at a preliminary exam harmless and criticized reliance on a transcript provided to trial counsel as a substitute for live cross-examination.
- McCormack concluded the Court of Appeals reached the correct harmless-error outcome despite its flawed reasoning, and urged the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify harmless-error review when counsel is denied at preliminary examinations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of counsel at preliminary examination was harmless error under Coleman | Trial conviction and availability of transcript show no prejudice | Deprivation of counsel at prelim can cause prejudice even if later convicted; transcript is inadequate substitution for live cross-exam | Denied leave to appeal; concurrence agrees harmlessness result stands but criticizes Court of Appeals' reasoning |
| Whether a later conviction makes Coleman’s first factor moot | Conviction indicates no fatal weaknesses would have been exposed earlier | Conviction cannot be presumed to cure the earlier denial of counsel | Court of Appeals treated conviction as relevant; concurrence says conviction cannot be dispositive |
| Weight of preliminary-exam transcript given to trial counsel | Transcript mitigates harm by preserving record for trial use | Transcript cannot replace opportunities for skilled live cross-examination or impeachment | Concurrence: transcript entitled to little weight though outcome found harmless on other factors |
| Need for higher-court guidance on harmless-error standard in this context | Existing Coleman framework is sufficient to find harmlessness here | Coleman is unclear and may preclude intuitive harm assessments; Supreme Court clarification needed | Concurrence urges U.S. Supreme Court to clarify or reassess Coleman harmless-error approach |
Key Cases Cited
- Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1 (1970) (establishes role of counsel at preliminary examination and framework for harmless-error analysis)
- People v. Lewis, 501 Mich. 1 (2017) (Michigan Supreme Court decision addressing denial of counsel at preliminary examination)
- People v. Lewis (On Remand), 322 Mich. App. 22 (2017) (Court of Appeals opinion on remand analyzing harmless-error under Coleman)