People of Michigan v. James Dangelo Sims
327562
| Mich. Ct. App. | Aug 9, 2016Background
- Police executed a warrant at Sims’s home and found 18.7 grams of black tar heroin, cocaine residue, a scale, baggies, a razor blade with residue, a red cell phone with texts suggesting drug transactions, cutting agent in the garage, and $1,545 in cash on Sims.
- An unnamed informant told officers he had been inside Sims’s home and saw a large quantity of cocaine; the affidavit did not describe the informant’s veracity or how the informant’s prior tips had been reliable.
- At the scene Sims fled from officers; co-resident John Riley had small marijuana/paraphernalia and trace cocaine but no cash. Both men testified Riley was the dealer.
- Trial court denied Sims’s motion to suppress; a jury convicted Sims of possession with intent to deliver <50g heroin and possession of <25g cocaine, both enhanced as subsequent offenses.
- On appeal Sims challenged the warrant’s probable-cause sufficiency, asserted Confrontation Clause and discovery rights regarding the informant, contested admission of prior drug convictions (other-acts evidence), and argued ineffective assistance for failure to call a defense witness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for search warrant | Affidavit provided sufficient basis (informant saw drugs in house; corroboration of address and nickname) | Affidavit relied almost entirely on unnamed informant and omitted facts on informant’s veracity/reliability, so no probable cause | Warrant was constitutionally deficient for lack of informant veracity evidence, but suppression denied under good-faith exception |
| Good-faith exception to exclusionary rule | Officers reasonably relied on a magistrate-issued warrant | Evidence should be excluded because warrant lacked probable cause | Leon good-faith exception applied; officers’ reliance objectively reasonable, so evidence admitted |
| Confrontation / production of confidential informant | Not applicable at trial (prosecution did not elicit informant statements) | Sims sought informant’s production at suppression hearing and argued confrontation violation | No Confrontation Clause violation because informant’s out-of-court statements were not admitted at suppression or trial; plain-error review found none |
| Admission of prior drug offenses (other-acts) | Prior convictions show knowledge/intent/common plan | Prior acts were dissimilar and primarily show propensity; admission was unfairly prejudicial | Trial court abused discretion admitting prior acts under MRE 404(b); error was harmless due to overwhelming untainted evidence of guilt |
| Ineffective assistance for not calling Williams | N/A (prosecution argued evidence placed Sims as dealer) | Failure to call Williams (who would say he bought from Riley, not Sims) was deficient and prejudicial | No ineffective assistance: tactical decision, and no reasonable probability of different outcome given strong evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (totality-of-the-circumstances test for informant tips)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- People v. Keller, 479 Mich. 467 (magistrate’s role and reviewing probable-cause sufficiency)
- People v. Goldston, 470 Mich. 523 (Michigan adoption of Leon good-faith principles)
- People v. VanderVliet, 444 Mich. 52 (test for admissibility of other-acts evidence under MRE 404(b))
- People v. Starr, 457 Mich. 490 (limits on using other-acts to show propensity)
- People v. Lukity, 460 Mich. 484 (harmless-error standard for evidentiary rulings)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective-assistance claims)
- United States v. Weaver, 99 F.3d 1372 (corroboration of informant tips may bolster weak affidavits)
- People v. Chambers, 277 Mich. App. 1 (informant statements are generally testimonial for Confrontation Clause purposes)