People of Michigan v. Jeffrey Lynntoin McIntosh
327670
| Mich. Ct. App. | Oct 13, 2016Background
- Defendant Jeffrey McIntosh was convicted by a jury of second-degree murder, felon in possession of a firearm, and felony-firearm for the shooting death of Darnell Spears; sentenced as a second-offense habitual offender to concurrent 20–30 years and 30–60 months, consecutive to 2 years for felony-firearm.
- McIntosh denied shooting the victim and challenged trial counsel mid-trial, requesting substitution and a bench trial instead of the jury trial counsel pursued.
- Before trial McIntosh sent a letter complaining about limited counsel contact but did not request substitution until the second day of the jury trial.
- At trial Sergeant Derrick Griffin testified about receiving a report from a federal employee indicating phone calls between numbers associated with McIntosh and another person; the report itself was not admitted into evidence.
- McIntosh objected to admission of the phone-record testimony on foundation and hearsay grounds and sought substitution of counsel; the trial court denied both requests.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding no abuse of discretion in denying substitution and no error in admitting Griffin’s limited testimony about the report (not admitted for its truth).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (McIntosh) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Motion for substitute counsel | Deny: no good cause shown; substitution would disrupt trial | Counsel failed to meet/contact; disagrees on jury vs. bench trial strategy; requests new counsel mid-trial | Denied — no breakdown over fundamental tactic, request untimely and disruptive; no abuse of discretion |
| Right to bench trial | Prosecutor not required to consent; court need not grant bench trial | Asserted desire for bench trial because jury could misuse prior conviction evidence | Rejected — defendant has no absolute right to bench trial (must have prosecutor consent and court approval) |
| Admission of testimony about phone-record report — foundation/authentication | Testimony authenticated as Griffin received report and it explained investigative shift; report not offered as substantive evidence | Argues federal employee prepared report, original reviewer did not testify, so foundation lacking; underlying records unauthenticated | Admitted limited testimony for context; authentication under MRE 901 satisfied as to the report Griffin received; no abuse of discretion |
| Hearsay objection to phone-record testimony | Testimony not offered for truth of underlying call data but to explain investigative actions; jury instructed limiting its use | Argues report was hearsay proving calls/timing and thus inadmissible without proper exception | Overruled — testimony was not admitted for truth of matter asserted and trial court gave limiting instructions; not hearsay in that limited purpose |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Traylor, 245 Mich. App. 460 (2001) (standard for substitute counsel: good cause and lack of unreasonable disruption)
- People v Mack, 190 Mich. App. 7 (1991) (defendant must show good cause and substitution must not unreasonably disrupt process)
- People v Norman, 184 Mich. App. 255 (1990) (appellant cannot leave points undeveloped; appellate court need not search record for basis)
- Morris v Slappy, 461 U.S. 1 (1983) (Sixth Amendment claim framework for counsel substitution and defendant’s rights)
- Mitcham v Detroit, 355 Mich. 182 (1959) (failure to adequately brief/argue an issue on appeal constitutes abandonment)
- People v Waclawski, 286 Mich. App. 634 (2009) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)