People of Michigan v. Sammy Lee Pettes, 330711

On Oct. 13, 2014 a street altercation in Detroit between two groups escalated into a firefight; Joseph Tanksley Jr. (the victim) was shot and died that day. Defendant Pettes was charged with second-degree murder and felony-firearm and convicted by a jury.
Identification evidence was central: Talaya Johnson, the victim’s father (Joe Sr.), and brother (Walker) identified Pettes at trial; only Johnson had identified him at an earlier corporeal line-up.
Seven of eight line-up viewers did not identify Pettes; prosecution explained hat use in the line-up concealed the defendant’s distinctive hairstyle.
Prosecution introduced two Facebook photographs depicting Pettes holding handguns (one revolver, one automatic); the court admitted the images as relevant to access to a weapon of the type used in the crime.
Johnson initially claimed not to remember the shooter; she later identified Pettes after being shown her prior statement and testified she had moved out of state because of threats communicated to her by her brother.
On appeal Pettes challenged (1) admission of the Facebook photos (relevance, authentication, hearsay, MRE 404(b), MRE 403) and (2) admission of Johnson’s testimony about threats (hearsay/prejudice). The Court of Appeals affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of Facebook photos	Photos show defendant and guns, proving access to weapon type; relevant	Photos irrelevant, unauthenticated, hearsay, improper 404(b) propensity evidence, unfairly prejudicial under MRE 403	Admitted: photos were relevant direct evidence of access to weapon type; 404(b) not implicated; foundation sufficient; probative > prejudicial
Authentication of social-media images	Officer located images on Facebook page bearing defendant’s name and gang; jurors could compare images to defendant	Name misspelled on page; insufficient foundation and authentication	Authentication under MRE 901(a) satisfied; any remaining doubts go to weight, not admissibility
Hearsay objection to photographs	Photograph is nonverbal; hearsay rule inapplicable	Photos are out-of-court assertions and thus hearsay	Photographs are not hearsay under MRE 801 (nonassertive)
Admission of Johnson’s testimony about threats	Testimony explains her fear and memory failure; offered to show effect on listener, not truth of threats	Testimony was prejudicial hearsay implying defendant’s dangerousness	Admissible: offered to explain witness’s state of mind and memory lapse; court did not abuse discretion though testimony posed prejudice risk

People v. Hall, 433 Mich. 573 (defendant’s possession of weapon like that used in offense is relevant)
People v. VanderVliet, 444 Mich. 52 (404(b) not implicated where evidence does not require character inference)
People v. McDade, 301 Mich. App. 343 (authentication requirement for evidence)
People v. White, 208 Mich. App. 126 (foundational shortfalls affect weight, not admissibility, once MRE 901 satisfied)
People v. Blackston, 481 Mich. 451 (MRE 403 balancing factors for probative value vs. unfair prejudice)
People v. Dobek, 274 Mich. App. 58 (abuse of discretion standard for admissibility rulings)
People v. Schaw, 288 Mich. App. 231 (definition of abuse of discretion)
People v. Smith, 282 Mich. App. 191 (close evidentiary questions not an abuse of discretion)