People of Michigan v. Robert Lee Rosa
322 Mich. App. 726
Mich. Ct. App.2018Background
- Defendant Robert Lee Rosa assaulted his ex-wife on March 6, 2016: placed a pillow over her face, looped a belt around her neck twice (the second time cutting off breathing), produced bruising and ocular petechiae, while a young child slept beside the victim.
- Defendant was convicted of assault with intent to commit murder, assault by strangulation, and domestic violence; sentenced as a second-offense habitual offender to 300–600 months on the intent-to-murder count (guidelines recommended 135–281 months) plus additional sentences on the other counts.
- At trial, the prosecution introduced testimony by defendant’s first wife recounting alleged prior domestic violence from at least 16 years earlier.
- Defendant raised five issues on appeal: admissibility of other-acts evidence, refusal to give a mitigating-circumstances jury instruction, ineffective assistance of counsel, and several sentencing challenges (OV 3, OV 4, OV 7 scoring and reasonableness of upward departure).
- The Court of Appeals concluded the prior-wife testimony was improperly admitted under both MCL 768.27b and MRE 404(b) but found the error harmless, rejected the instructional and ineffective-assistance claims, and upheld the OV scores and upward departure sentence as reasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior-acts testimony under MCL 768.27b | Evidence of prior domestic violence (even >10 yrs) is probative of propensity and fits interest-of-justice exception | Prior acts occurred >10 years earlier and are not uniquely probative; admission exceeded statute | Evidence older than 10 years was improperly admitted under MCL 768.27b; interest-of-justice exception must be narrow; error harmless due to overwhelming untainted evidence |
| Admissibility under MRE 404(b) | Alternatively admissible under 404(b) for non-propensity purposes (pattern, intent, identity) | Purpose was propensity; not probative of identity, intent, or pattern beyond showing bad character | Not admissible under MRE 404(b); purpose was propensity and risk of unfair prejudice outweighed any marginal probative value |
| Jury instruction on mitigating circumstances (heat of passion/voluntary manslaughter) | Defendant testified to being suicidal/psychotic, highly emotional, under influence—warranting M Crim JI 17.4 instruction | No evidence emotional excitement was caused by something that would cause an ordinary person to act rashly; assault was not sudden impulse | Trial court properly refused instruction; no heat-of-passion evidence; no violation of right to present a defense |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (cross-exam asking officer opinion on intent) | Counsel elicited officer's belief that defendant intended to murder, harming defense | Counsel legitimately sought to distinguish belief from knowledge; tactical decision | No ineffective assistance; questioning was trial strategy and not plainly deficient |
| OV scoring (3, 4, 7) and reasonableness of upward departure | OV 7/4/3 improperly scored, altering guidelines; 300-month minimum is disproportionate | OV 7 (excessive brutality), OV 4 (serious psychological injury), OV 3 (life‑threatening injury) supported by record; departure justified by defendant’s long history and presence of child | OV 7, OV 4, OV 3 scoring upheld; upward departure (300–600 mos) was reasonable and proportionate; sentence affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Young, 472 Mich 130 (discussing harmless-error framework for other-acts evidence)
- People v Feezel, 486 Mich 184 (other-acts/harmless-error principles)
- People v Peltola, 489 Mich 174 (statutory construction; avoid surplusage)
- People v Denson, 500 Mich 385 (risks of other-acts evidence and careful harmless-error review)
- People v McDaniel, 469 Mich 409 (standard of review for evidentiary rulings)
- People v Horn, 279 Mich App 31 (trial strategy presumption for counsel decisions)
- People v Sabin (On Second Remand), 242 Mich App 656 (ineffective-assistance standards)
- People v Pouncey, 437 Mich 382 (heat-of-passion instruction guidance)
- People v Hardy, 494 Mich 430 (OV 7 interpretive guidance)
- People v Milbourn, 435 Mich 630 (departure and proportionality principles)
- People v Lockridge, 498 Mich 358 (guidelines reasonableness analysis)