People of Michigan v. Shae Lynn Mullins
322 Mich. App. 151
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Defendant Shae Mullins coached her daughter (PD) to tell a school teacher that PD’s father (Dominion) had sexually abused her, allegedly to obtain more custody time or other rewards.
- PD told her teacher that Dominion “hurt [her] private parts”; the teacher reported to the principal, who reported to Child Protective Services (CPS). PD later admitted defendant told her to lie.
- Defendant had a history (2008) of making similar complaints that led to three CPS investigations and a petition that temporarily placed PD in foster care; those prior incidents were unsubstantiated.
- Defendant was charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor (MCL 750.145) and making a false report of felony child abuse (MCL 722.633(5)); the district court initially refused to bind over the false-report charge.
- The circuit court reversed, applying the common-law innocent-agent doctrine and allowing the charge to proceed; at trial the jury convicted defendant of both counts and she was sentenced to seven days in jail and two years’ probation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MCL 722.633(5) applies only to mandatory reporters | Statute criminalizes making a false report “under this act”; plaintiff argued it covers any person who makes a CPS report under the Child Protection Law | Mullins argued "under this act" limits liability to mandatory reporters listed in MCL 722.623 | Held: Statute covers both mandatory and non-mandatory reporters; MCL 722.624 expressly allows any person to report, so the statute’s plain meaning includes non-mandatory reporters. |
| Whether defendant can be convicted when she did not personally make the CPS report (use of innocent agents) | Prosecution: common-law innocent-agent doctrine makes a person who uses others to report liable as a principal under MCL 722.633(5) | Mullins: Statute lacks language like MCL 750.411a (“or intentionally causes a false report ... to be made”), so she argues Legislature did not intend to reach those who cause reports through others | Held: Court applies innocent-agent doctrine; defendant liable as principal for causing PD (and mandatory reporters) to make false report. |
| Admissibility of 2008 CPS investigations under MRE 404(b) | Prosecution: prior acts show motive, intent, plan/scheme—using PD to trigger CPS investigations and suspend Dominion’s parenting time | Mullins: Prior-acts evidence was unfairly prejudicial and inadmissible | Held: Admission was proper under Huddleston/VanderVliet test; probative value (common scheme/motive) outweighed risk of unfair prejudice. |
| Prosecutorial misconduct in closing argument | Prosecution argued evidence of a continuing scheme since 2008; framed as consistent inference from the evidence | Mullins: Argued prosecutor improperly suggested propensity to lie and other-acts as character evidence | Held: No plain-error; arguments related to evidence and reasonable inferences; jury instructions cured any potential overstatements. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Gardner, 482 Mich 41 (statutory interpretation reviewed de novo)
- People v Ambrose, 317 Mich App 556 (statutory construction and ordinary meaning of words)
- People v Hack, 219 Mich App 299 (describing innocent-agent doctrine/principal liability)
- Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (admissibility test for other-acts evidence adopted in Michigan)
- People v VanderVliet, 444 Mich 52 (Michigan adoption of Huddleston three-part test)
- People v Sabin, 463 Mich 43 (application of other-acts admissibility and prejudice balancing)
- People v Watkins, 491 Mich 450 (limits on inferring legislative intent from later enactments)