People of Michigan v. Jawon Lamar Marbury
331831
| Mich. Ct. App. | Jul 13, 2017Background
- July 22, 2014: Elderly homeowner Constance Retland was found injured and later died of blunt-force head and face injuries; televisions had been removed from her apartment.
- Defendant Marbury and co-defendant Jason Fulbright had recently been living in Retland's home; Retland had begun eviction proceedings a week before the incident.
- Fulbright initially denied involvement, then signed statements inculpating Marbury and later pleaded guilty to second-degree murder; he testified for the prosecution at Marbury's trial.
- Detective Scott Shea testified about both Fulbright’s initial and subsequent statements; the prosecutor elicited testimony that Fulbright’s later statements were consistent with earlier ones.
- Marbury was convicted by a jury of first-degree felony murder, first-degree home invasion, and larceny in a building; sentenced to life plus additional terms; he appealed asserting ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to hearsay and prosecutorial bolstering.
Issues
| Issue | People’s Argument | Marbury’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance by not objecting to Detective Shea’s testimony that Fulbright’s out-of-court statements were consistent | Admission was proper or harmless because jury already knew about Fulbright’s changing statements and credibility was for the jury | Failure to object to hearsay bolstering Fulbright’s credibility was objectively unreasonable and prejudicial | Court: Shea’s testimony was hearsay and MRE 801(d)(1)(B) did not apply, but failure to object was a reasonable trial strategy; no ineffective assistance shown |
| Whether defense counsel was ineffective for not objecting to alleged improper bolstering of Fulbright during closing argument | Prosecutor’s comments were permissible credibility argument given conflicting evidence | Closing argument vouched for witness credibility and counsel should have objected | Court: Prosecutor did not imply special knowledge; comments were permissible; objection would be futile; no ineffective assistance |
| Whether the prior consistent statement exception (MRE 801(d)(1)(B)) applied to Fulbright’s statements | N/A (prosecution did not rely on a specific hearsay exception on appeal) | Fulbright’s motive to fabricate existed before the later statement, so the exception did not apply | Court: MRE 801(d)(1)(B) inapplicable because motive to fabricate predated both statements |
| Whether failure to preserve ineffective-assistance claim affected review | N/A | Claim preserved by appeal even without lower-court Ginther hearing | Court: Issue unpreserved; review limited to errors apparent on the record; nevertheless addressed merits under that standard |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Petri, 279 Mich. App. 407 (defendant must timely move for a new trial or Ginther hearing to preserve ineffective-assistance claim)
- People v. Davis, 250 Mich. App. 357 (appellate review of unpreserved ineffective-assistance claims limited to record mistakes)
- People v. Matuszak, 263 Mich. App. 42 (ineffective-assistance standard; deference to strategic choices)
- People v. Swain, 288 Mich. App. 609 (presumption of effective assistance; burden on defendant)
- People v. Fonville, 291 Mich. App. 363 (Strickland framework applied)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (constitutional standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- People v. Unger, 278 Mich. App. 210 (wide latitude given to counsel’s trial strategy)
- People v. Shaw, 315 Mich. App. 668 (inadmissible hearsay and when failure to object is unreasonable)
- People v. Jones, 240 Mich. App. 704 (prior consistent statement must predate motive to fabricate)
- People v. Kevorkian, 248 Mich. App. 373 (unsuccessful strategy does not prove incompetence)
- People v. Thomas, 260 Mich. App. 450 (limits on prosecutor vouching for witnesses)
- People v. Johnson, 315 Mich. App. 163 (no ineffective assistance for failure to raise futile objections)