985 N.W.2d 853
Mich. Ct. App.2022Background
- Defendant Sherikia Hawkins was Southfield's elected city clerk and managed absentee-voter (AV) processing in the November 6, 2018 general election.
- During the county canvass, discrepancies emerged: ballot-summary carbon copies were blank, some precinct tabulator data showed zero ballots counted, and not all AV ballots appeared to have been tabulated on election night.
- A BOE query showed 193 QVF voter-record modifications made Nov 14–15 by user "SHERIKIA@74900" changing previously accepted AV ballots to “not received” or “rejected for no signature.”
- County canvassers found original QVF reports (one recovered from a trash can), physically recounted and re-tabulated ballots, and compared them to a revised QVF Hawkins had provided to the Board.
- Hawkins was bound over in district court on: (1) falsifying election records (MCL 168.932(c)); (2) forgery / falsifying a public record (MCL 750.248); (3) misconduct in office (common law, MCL 750.505); and (4) three computer-crime counts (MCL 752.796) tied to the predicate offenses. The circuit court quashed Counts 1–2 and the two related computer counts but refused to dismiss misconduct in office and its computer-count corollary.
- The prosecutor appealed the partial quash; Hawkins cross-appealed denial of dismissal of the misconduct-in-office count. The Court of Appeals reversed the quash of Counts 1–2 and the related computer counts, and affirmed denial of dismissal of the misconduct-in-office count.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether probable cause supported bindover for falsifying election records (MCL 168.932(c)) | Evidence showed Hawkins (city clerk) with custody of QVF willfully altered entries to conceal 193 valid AV ballots, satisfying the statute and intent-to-defraud inference | Hawkins argued the district court misstated law (intent) and that minor/partial edits do not make the statute applicable; circuit court relied on district court’s alleged misstatement to quash | Court held district court properly found probable cause: edits, user ID, timing, and corroborating anomalies supported willful falsification and intent to deceive; quash reversed |
| Whether probable cause supported bindover for falsification/forgery of a public record (MCL 750.248) | Hawkins generated and submitted a revised QVF that purported to be a correct list of AV voters but omitted/altered 193 entries—this is alteration/forgery of a public record with intent to defraud | Hawkins argued partial alteration of a record doesn’t transform it into a forgery; circuit court agreed and quashed | Court held the statute covers false-making and alteration as well as forgery; the revised QVF was a false public record and probable cause supported bindover; quash reversed |
| Whether computer-crime counts (MCL 752.796) tied to Counts 1–2 should stand | Predicate falsification/forgery were committed using the QVF computer system, satisfying the statute’s elements | Hawkins argued predicate offenses were quashed, so related computer counts must fall | Court held because bindovers for Counts 1–2 were proper and the record showed computer use to alter QVF, the related computer counts should not have been quashed |
| Whether common-law misconduct in office (MCL 750.505) is precluded by MCL 168.931(1)(h) (Election Law misdemeanor) | Prosecution: elements differ; Election Law misdemeanor does not displace common-law misconduct in office; misconduct requires public-officer status and corrupt intent | Hawkins: identical elements; Election Law statutory prohibition (including disobeying Secretary’s order) forecloses common-law prosecution | Court held elements differ (misconduct requires public-officer and corrupt intent; MCL 168.931(1)(h) applies more broadly), so the common-law misconduct charge and related computer count remain viable; dismissal denied |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Plunkett, 485 Mich 50 (standard for preliminary examination and bindover)
- People v Hudson, 241 Mich App 268 (probable-cause/bindover review framework)
- Flick v Dep't of Treasury, 487 Mich 1 (statutory interpretation principles)
- People v Yost, 468 Mich 122 (definition of probable cause in criminal context)
- People v Johnson-El, 299 Mich App 648 (forgery statute explained: false making/alteration + intent to defraud)
- People v Perkins, 468 Mich 448 (common-law misconduct in office requires corrupt intent and public-officer status)
- People v Waterstone, 296 Mich App 121 (when statutory offense precludes common-law misconduct)
- People v Pinkney, 501 Mich 259 (context on Election Law forgery/penalty provisions)