People of Michigan v. Henry Lee Smith
328247
| Mich. Ct. App. | Jan 26, 2017Background
- Defendant Henry Lee Smith was convicted after a bench trial of assault with intent to commit murder, felon in possession, carrying a concealed firearm, and felony-firearm (second offense) for the December 2013 shooting of Matthew Ridley in a vacant house in Detroit.
- Victim Ridley testified that he and defendant, who sold drugs together, went to inspect the vacant house; while alone with defendant Ridley heard a gunshot, was shot in the head, and later saw defendant attempt to conceal a gun.
- Ridley survived but sustained brain injury that impaired memory; he took multiple medications, including one to improve memory.
- Defense theory emphasized Ridley’s brain injury, medication, inconsistent statements (e.g., color of the gun, how they arrived), and possible confabulation; defense waived a jury and proceeded to a bench trial.
- Defense raised numerous ineffective-assistance claims on appeal (failure to retain a medical expert re: memory, incomplete impeachment, failure to secure alibi witnesses, waiver of jury), and challenged several trial rulings (denial of directed verdict, hearsay exclusion, alleged Brady violation, cumulative error).
- The Court of Appeals affirmed: it found counsel’s performance reasonable, no prejudice shown, and no reversible trial error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for not obtaining a medical/expert witness on victim’s memory | Counsel reasonably investigated records and cross‑examined victim; no showing records supported expert or that expert testimony would help | Counsel should have procured an expert to establish confabulation/memory impairment from brain injury and medication | No ineffective assistance: defendant failed to show the records contained support for an expert or how an expert would have testified; counsel’s thorough cross‑examination was reasonable trial strategy |
| Failure to fully impeach / challenge identification | Prosecution relied on victim’s consistent core account; counsel elicited many inconsistencies and physical/medication limitations | Counsel did not pursue all avenues of impeachment (e.g., gun color, residence knowledge) | No ineffective assistance: counsel extensively impeached victim and used inconsistencies and medical history as strategy |
| Failure to present alibi witnesses | No showing that witnesses would have testified favorably; counsel attempted to secure them and trial was delayed for that purpose | Counsel failed to produce alibi witnesses and thus deprived defendant of exculpatory testimony | No ineffective assistance or prejudice: absence of any record showing what witnesses would have testified to defeats prejudice element |
| Hearsay exclusion / directed verdict / Brady / cumulative error | Trial court properly excluded hearsay (defendant lacked personal knowledge); evidence sufficed for directed verdict; prosecutor didn’t possess undisclosed medication info or any nondisclosure did not prejudice; no cumulative error | Court improperly excluded testimony about motive (hearsay), should have granted directed verdict given victim’s unreliable memory, prosecutor failed Brady by not disclosing victim’s memory medication | Court affirmed: hearsay exclusion was proper under MRE 602/801/802; directed verdict denial was proper because, viewed favorably to prosecution, victim’s testimony sufficiently identified defendant; no Brady violation or prejudice; no cumulative error |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Williams, 223 Mich. App. 409 (discussing review of ineffective-assistance claims on the record)
- People v LeBlanc, 465 Mich. 575 (mixed question: factual findings reviewed for clear error, legal questions de novo)
- People v Pickens, 446 Mich. 298 (ineffective-assistance test: performance and prejudice)
- People v Armstrong, 490 Mich. 281 (strong presumption of reasonable trial strategy)
- People v Hoag, 460 Mich. 1 (defendant bears burden to establish factual predicate for ineffective assistance)
- People v Rockey, 237 Mich. App. 74 (decisions about calling witnesses and evidence are trial strategy)
- People v Riley, 468 Mich. 135 (standard for reviewing motions for directed verdict)
- People v Lukity, 460 Mich. 484 (abuse-of-discretion review for evidentiary rulings)
- People v Hall, 435 Mich. 599 (errors at preliminary exam not grounds for vacating conviction where trial was fair)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (prosecutor’s duty to disclose evidence favorable to defendant)