People of Michigan v. Steve Nafie Gatie
329572
Mich. Ct. App.Jan 24, 2017Background
- Defendant was convicted at a bench trial of carrying a concealed weapon (MCL 750.227) after officers saw a bulge under his shirt consistent with a handgun while responding to reports of gunfire and fireworks.
- At the preliminary examination only Officer Peugh testified; witnesses had been sequestered (told to wait in the hallway).
- At the bench trial the court again ordered witness sequestration. Officer Ibrahimovic was not present for Officer Peugh’s trial testimony but later acknowledged he had read Peugh’s preliminary-exam transcript before testifying.
- Defense moved to dismiss, arguing Ibrahimovic violated the sequestration order by reviewing Peugh’s prior testimony and thereby potentially tailoring his testimony.
- The trial court found no violation and allowed defense cross-examination regarding the review; it convicted defendant of CCW and sentenced him to one year probation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Officer Ibrahimovic violated sequestration by reading Peugh’s preliminary-exam transcript | Prosecutor: No violation because exclusion prevents witnesses hearing live testimony; reading a transcript is not ‘‘hearing’’ testimony | Defendant: Review of the transcript violates sequestration and prejudiced defendant by allowing Ibrahimovic to conform testimony | Court held no violation: MRE 615 excludes witnesses from hearing testimony; it does not bar reading prior transcripts absent a further court instruction |
| Whether any sequestration breach required remedy (dismissal or preclusion) | Prosecutor: Even if improper, remedies are discretionary and less severe measures suffice | Defendant: Violation warranted dismissal/preclusion due to risk of bolstered, conforming testimony | Court held exclusion is extreme; allowing cross-examination was sufficient and defendant showed no record prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Roberts, 292 Mich. App. 492 (court reviews sequestration decisions for abuse of discretion)
- People v Jackson, 498 Mich. 246 (plain meaning of evidence rules governs)
- People v Meconi, 277 Mich. App. 651 (purpose of sequestration and available sanctions explained)
- People v Stanley, 71 Mich. App. 56 (distinguishes courtroom exclusion from a prohibition on witness discussion; absence of explicit no-discussion warning is not automatic violation)