People of Michigan v. Lasail D Hamilton, 327608

Defendant Lasail D. Hamilton was charged and convicted of felon-in-possession (MCL 750.224f), careless discharge of a firearm causing injury (MCL 752.861), and felony-firearm (MCL 750.227b); sentences: concurrent prison terms plus consecutive two years for felony-firearm.
Victim testified he and defendant were in a car when victim was shot; surveillance video showed defendant fleeing; the victim’s mother testified defendant admitted shooting her son; a bullet was recovered from the vehicle consistent with an inside discharge.
Defendant testified as an alibi, claiming he was at his cousin’s house; he sought to present two additional alibi witnesses only four or five days before trial and did not file the statutorily required advance alibi notice.
The trial court authorized funds for an investigator and the prosecutor also tried to locate the witnesses, but they were never found; defendant did not explain the late notice and did not expressly request a continuance.
The court admitted a certified record of defendant’s prior felony conviction to prove an element of felon-in-possession; defendant did not object at trial.
On appeal the Court of Appeals affirmed convictions and sentences but remanded for the trial court to establish a factual basis for or reconsider $600 in court costs.

Issue	People’s Argument	Hamilton’s Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying a continuance/precluding additional alibi witnesses for failure to comply with MCL 768.20(1)	Denial proper under statutory notice rule; prosecutor would be prejudiced and witnesses were not located	Trial court improperly foreclosed his alibi defense and abused discretion by not granting a continuance	Affirmed: no abuse of discretion; late notice, lack of explanation, prejudice, and weight of admitted evidence supported denial
Whether counsel was ineffective for not objecting to testimony about prior felony conviction	Admission was proper to prove an element of felon-in-possession, so objection would be meritless	Counsel’s failure to object deprived him of effective assistance	Affirmed: counsel not ineffective because objection would have been meritless
Whether defendant is entitled to a present ability-to-pay hearing for court-appointed attorney fees	Fees may be challenged at enforcement; no enforcement yet so premature	Requested present ability-to-pay hearing now	Denied as premature; challenge should await enforcement
Whether $600 in court costs was properly imposed	Prosecution concedes factual basis for amount should be established or costs re-determined	Challenges amount and requests remand	Remand required for trial court to establish factual basis for $600 or re-determine amount

People v. Travis, 443 Mich. 668 (governs timeliness and factors for excusing alibi-notice failure)
People v. Unger, 278 Mich. App. 210 (abuse-of-discretion standard)
People v. Waterstone, 296 Mich. App. 121 (trial-court legal-error abuse standard)
People v. Trakhtenberg, 493 Mich. 38 (standard of review for ineffective-assistance claims)
People v. Lopez, 305 Mich. App. 686 (limitations when claim not preserved; review of record for apparent errors)
People v. Vaughn, 491 Mich. 642 (Strickland standard applied by Michigan Supreme Court)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes ineffective-assistance test)
People v. Eisen, 296 Mich. App. 326 (presumption of effective assistance)
People v. Chelmicki, 305 Mich. App. 58 (no duty to make meritless objections)
People v. Kowalski, 489 Mich. 488 (plain-error review standard)
People v. Jackson, 483 Mich. 271 (ability-to-pay procedure for appointed counsel fees)
People v. Konopka (On Remand), 309 Mich. App. 345 (trial court must establish factual basis for costs)