People of Michigan v. Robert Deshawn Lewis
331513
| Mich. Ct. App. | May 18, 2017Background
- Defendant lived with the victims (two girls under 13) while dating their mother and was convicted after a jury trial of one count first-degree CSC and five counts second-degree CSC (fourth offense) for sexual assaults occurring Jan 2013–Mar 2014; sentence included 25–50 years and concurrent 200–360 months terms.
- The charged offenses involved one incident of penetration and multiple incidents of touching victims’ breasts or vaginas, often at night on the family couch while the children wore pajamas.
- The prosecutor introduced testimony from an older sister, NM (16 at the time), describing a separate, similar touching incident on a couch; defendant previously pled nolo contendere to attempted fourth-degree CSC for that incident.
- The trial court closed the courtroom briefly during testimony of the two minor victims; defendant remained present and counsel stayed in the room.
- Defense counsel’s attempt to elicit testimony from a Care House interviewer (Heather Solomon) about what the victims told her was excluded as hearsay; the court also assessed $4,500 in costs (including $3,625 in attorney fees).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of NM’s testimony/other-acts evidence under MCL 768.27a and MRE 403 | Other-acts evidence is admissible to show pattern, modus operandi, and is probative despite any propensity inference | Testimony was irrelevant/dissimilar (victim 16 v. victims <13), temporally distant, single incident, unfairly prejudicial | Admitted: other-acts statute covers minors <18; similarities (location, timing, secrecy, touching) and temporal proximity supported probative value; no abuse of discretion |
| Sixth Amendment right to public trial — courtroom closure during minor victims’ testimony | Closure was warranted to protect child witnesses and was narrowly tailored; alternatives considered | Closure violated right to public trial; requested closed-circuit broadcast or other alternatives | Closure upheld: court made findings, considered minors’ age and sensitive nature, closure limited in scope; no reversible error |
| Right to present a defense — hearsay exclusion of interviewer testimony | Proffered testimony was not hearsay but the absence of a statement; was necessary to present defense | Excluding testimony deprived defendant of ability to challenge allegations | Exclusion affirmed: questions sought out‑of‑court statements (classic hearsay); trial court properly sustained objections |
| Imposition of costs (including attorney fees) at sentencing | Statute permits assessment of costs including expenses for legal assistance without separate factual findings or detailed calculation | Imposition of attorney fees required specific findings and calculation | Costs upheld: statutory language permits a lump-sum award for costs including attorney-fee component; no plain error shown |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. McGhee, 268 Mich. App. 600 (other-acts evidence reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- People v. Watkins, 491 Mich. 450 (MCL 768.27a remains subject to MRE 403; balancing probative value of other-acts evidence)
- Presley v. Georgia, 558 U.S. 209 (closure of courtroom requires overriding interest, narrow tailoring, consideration of alternatives, and adequate findings)
- People v. Vaughn, 491 Mich. 642 (public trial right and limits on closure)
- People v. Carines, 460 Mich. 750 (plain-error standard for unpreserved constitutional claims)