People of Michigan v. Michael Douglas Poole Sr
330735
Mich. Ct. App.May 16, 2017Background
- Defendant Michael Poole pleaded no contest to two counts of first-degree felony murder (felony: CSC) after preliminary-exam evidence and autopsies showed he choked to death his girlfriend and her 11-year-old daughter and admitted the killings.
- Defense counsel requested a Center for Forensic Psychiatry (CFP) evaluation for competency and criminal responsibility; the CFP concluded Poole was competent and criminally responsible and that reported mental-health problems were likely tied to substance abuse.
- At the plea hearing, Poole acknowledged signing advisals, understanding consequences (life without parole as a fourth-offender), and pleaded no contest voluntarily, citing civil-liability concerns and memory problems; the court accepted the plea and later sentenced him to life without parole.
- Postconviction, appointed appellate counsel moved to withdraw the plea alleging ineffective assistance during the plea process: counsel failed to investigate mental-health history and failed to obtain an independent criminal-responsibility evaluation.
- At the Ginther hearing, trial counsel testified he requested the CFP evaluation, reviewed it with Poole, offered an independent evaluation which Poole declined to pursue because he wanted to move the case forward; Poole denied being informed of the independent-evaluation right.
- Trial court denied the motion to withdraw the plea; the Court of Appeals affirmed, finding counsel’s investigation and advice reasonable and deferring to the trial court’s credibility findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel failed to investigate mental-health history | Counsel did investigate: requested CFP evaluation based on reported history | Counsel inadequately investigated and missed mitigating mental-health evidence | Held for plaintiff: counsel did investigate; no ineffective assistance on this ground |
| Whether counsel failed to obtain/advise re: independent criminal-responsibility evaluation | Counsel informed Poole and offered independent evaluation; Poole declined to proceed | Counsel did not inform Poole of right to independent evaluation, so Poole pled without knowing options | Held for plaintiff: trial court credited counsel; Poole declined; no ineffective assistance |
| Whether any counsel error prejudiced plea under Strickland/Lafler | No—CFP found Poole competent and criminally responsible; no reasonable probability outcome would differ | Yes—an independent eval might have shown insanity/mitigation and changed plea/outcome | Held for plaintiff: no prejudice shown; Poole presented no evidence independent eval would have changed result |
| Whether voluntary intoxication/substance-linked mental status could have excused/mitigated | Statutory law limits insanity/defense when impairment is due to voluntarily consumed substances | Poole’s mental issues tied to substance abuse; thus less likely to support legal insanity | Held for plaintiff: substance-related issues weigh against an insanity defense; no basis to find counsel ineffective on this point |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance test: performance and prejudice)
- Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012) (right to effective assistance in plea-bargaining context; prejudice requires showing plea process outcome would differ)
- People v. Douglas, 496 Mich. 557 (2014) (applies Strickland/Lafler standards in Michigan plea context)
- People v. Effinger, 212 Mich. App. 67 (1995) (standard of review for motion to withdraw plea: abuse of discretion)