People of Michigan v. Nicholas Jamal-Leevel Thomas, 326956

Background

In July 2014 a street fight between defendant Nicholas Thomas and victim Tony Floyd culminated in Thomas shooting Floyd; Thomas admitted firing but claimed self‑defense and that he intended only a leg shot.
A 10‑second cell‑phone video showing the tail end of the fight and the shooting was introduced by the prosecution; a longer ~2‑minute recording reportedly existed but was unavailable.
Defense asserted the longer video and other witnesses would show onlookers (including "Schmoit"/Brandon Brown and Chris Kilgore) brandishing guns, supporting Thomas’s claim he acted in self‑defense and to disarm Shackleford.
The jury acquitted Thomas of assault with intent to murder but convicted him of assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder, carrying a concealed weapon, felon in possession of a firearm, and felony‑firearm.
On appeal Thomas challenged admission of the 10‑second clip (authentication, completeness under MRE 106, and MRE 403 prejudice), raised ineffective assistance claims about pretrial investigation, and claimed the trial court should have given a self‑defense instruction for the felon‑in‑possession count.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Authentication of video	Video was properly authenticated by victim testimony and defendant’s references	Video required additional authentication from original recorder or source	Affirmed: Victim’s testimony and defendant’s own references satisfied MRE 901 and waived challenge
Rule of completeness (MRE 106)	Short clip need not be excluded when longer recording is unavailable	10‑sec clip misleading; full recording should be required or clip excluded	Affirmed: MRE 106 is a rule of inclusion, not exclusion; absence of longer video does not mandate exclusion (citing Steinle, McGuffey)
Prejudicial effect under MRE 403	Clip was highly probative (shows defendant shooting) and not unfairly prejudicial	Clip created false impression by omitting context and thus was unduly prejudicial	Affirmed: Probative value not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice given other witness testimony and credibility findings
Ineffective assistance for failure to investigate videos/witnesses	Prosecution had lead on longer video and defense counsel should have located witnesses and footage	Counsel’s investigation not shown in record; no evidentiary showing that missing evidence existed or would change outcome	Denied: Record insufficient to overcome Strickland presumption; claim must be developed in post‑trial hearing
Jury instruction on self‑defense for felon‑in‑possession	Self‑defense instruction should have been given for felon‑in‑possession count	Court did instruct on self‑defense for other counts and omission was harmless	Affirmed: Even if applicable, omission harmless because jury rejected self‑defense on other weapons counts and convicted those offenses

Key Cases Cited

People v. Gursky, 486 Mich. 596 (Mich. 2010) (standard of review for evidentiary rulings)
People v. McGuffey, 251 Mich. App. 155 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002) (MRE 106 is pertinent only if opponent sought but was denied admission of additional parts)
State v. Steinle, 239 Ariz. 415 (Ariz. 2016) (Rule of completeness is one of inclusion; absence of original longer recording does not require exclusion)
People v. Mills, 450 Mich. 61 (Mich. 1995) (MRE 403 prejudice standard)
People v. Carines, 460 Mich. 750 (Mich. 1999) (plain‑error review standard in criminal cases)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (ineffective assistance two‑part test)
People v. Dupree, 486 Mich. 693 (Mich. 2010) (self‑defense instruction applicable when supported by evidence)
People v. Riddle, 467 Mich. 116 (Mich. 2002) (right to a properly instructed jury and self‑defense framework)