People of Michigan v. Matthew Ryan McBee
330048
| Mich. Ct. App. | May 9, 2017Background
- Defendant Matthew McBee convicted by jury of first-degree criminal sexual conduct (penetration of child under 13) and sentenced to 25–60 years under Michigan statutory mandatory minimum.
- Victim (HM), age seven, disclosed that McBee made her put his penis in her mouth and that "the milk" got in her mouth; mother found pornographic magazines in the home.
- Forensic testing: sperm cells on a couch cushion produced a partial DNA profile matching McBee at several loci; victim’s exam showed no obvious trauma and vulvar swab/underwear matched the victim.
- Defense attacked the CARE House forensic interview through expert Dr. Katherine Okla (criticizing follow-up and hypothesis testing); prosecution rebutted with expert Sarah Killips (defending interview methods and disputing contamination by outside influences).
- On appeal McBee raised multiple claims: prosecutorial error (improper drug-sale question), juror misconduct, improper expert vouching and ineffective assistance for failing to object, separation-of-powers and cruel-and-unusual challenges to mandatory minimum, and hearsay at trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prosecutorial error (drug-sale question on cross) | Prosecution: question relevant impeachment or defense-driven issue | McBee: single question improperly suggested he sold drugs and prejudiced jury | Court: question improper but not outcome-determinative; no mistrial (error cured/no evidence it affected verdict) |
| Juror misconduct (alleged extra-record text) | Prosecution: no proof jury exposed to extraneous info | McBee: juror text message to third party showed misconduct affecting impartiality | Court: affidavit double-hearsay inadmissible; even if true no proof jury received extraneous information; no mistrial or hearing granted |
| Expert vouching / ineffective assistance (Killips testimony) | Prosecution: rebuttal expert legitimately addressed interview quality and alternative hypotheses | McBee: Killips implicitly/explicitly bolstered HM’s credibility; counsel ineffective for not objecting | Court: one statement improperly bolstered credibility but harmless given competing expert testimony; counsel’s failure to object not constitutionally deficient |
| Separation of powers & cruel/unusual challenge to 25-year min | Prosecution: Legislature may set mandatory penalties; precedent upholds 25-year minimum | McBee: mandatory minimum deprives judiciary of sentencing discretion and is cruel/unusual | Court: mandatory statutory minimum is legislative prerogative—no separation-of-powers violation; prior precedent rejects cruel/unusual challenge; claim fails |
| Hearsay (nurse repeating mother’s remark) / ineffective assistance | Prosecution: testimony described the circumstances of victim’s hospital disclosure (non-hearsay purpose) | McBee: nurse’s repetition of mother’s line improperly bolstered victim; counsel ineffective for failing to object | Court: statement offered to describe in-hospital disclosure context (non-hearsay); no error and no ineffective assistance for not objecting |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Mesik (On Reconsideration), 285 Mich. App. 535 (2009) (prosecutor’s questions are not evidence; improper questioning may be cured where jury instructed and no evidence introduced)
- People v. Budzyn, 456 Mich. 77 (1997) (jurors may consider only evidence admitted in court; attorney affidavits about juror statements are inadmissible hearsay)
- People v. Peterson, 450 Mich. 349 (1995) (risks of expert testimony touching on child complainant credibility)
- People v. Carines, 460 Mich. 750 (1999) (plain-error standard articulated for unpreserved appellate claims)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-pronged test for ineffective assistance of counsel)