People of Michigan v. Tjuan Aquis McCloud
333932
| Mich. Ct. App. | Dec 12, 2017Background
- On April 19, 2015 Henry Perry was lured, robbed, and shot; four defendants (Brown, Fields, McCloud, Webster) were tried together on felony murder, second-degree murder, and armed robbery; a fifth accomplice, Ashley Thompson, testified for the prosecution.
- Thompson testified Fields and Webster planned the robbery; Brown drove the getaway car; McCloud removed Perry’s shorts and later was found with Perry’s ID and credit card.
- Cell‑phone records and internet searches tied defendants to the scene and to an Impala used in the crime; an eyewitness (Floria Thomas) corroborated aspects of the shooting and flight.
- All four were convicted; second‑degree murder convictions were vacated at sentencing; each received life without parole for felony murder plus additional prison terms for armed robbery.
- On appeal the Court of Appeals consolidated the appeals, affirmed convictions and sentences, but remanded Brown’s case for a ministerial correction to his Sentencing Information Report (PRV scoring).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failing to seek separate trials/juries (Brown, Fields) | Joint trial was proper; no prejudice shown | Counsel should have moved for severance/separate juries due to antagonistic defenses | Denied — no mutually exclusive defenses; aiding and abetting theory permits fingerpointing; no showing of prejudice |
| Jury instruction on flight as consciousness of guilt (Brown, Fields, Webster) | Instruction appropriate given evidence of hasty departure | Instruction unsupported because departures were not to evade capture | Affirmed — evidence permitted jury to infer flight could show guilty state of mind |
| Sufficiency / great‑weight of evidence (Brown) | Evidence was sufficient; no miscarriage of justice | Thompson’s ID contradicted; cell‑site data placed Brown away from scene | Affirmed — credibility conflicts not enough; cell‑site limits explained by expert; no plain miscarriage of justice |
| Sentencing/PRV scoring error (Brown) | Correct PRV7 score should reflect only one concurrent conviction | Trial court erred by assigning 20 points for PRV7 | Remand for ministerial correction of Brown’s SIR (reduce PRV7 to 10 points); no resentencing needed |
| Batson challenge to prosecutor’s peremptories (McCloud) | Prosecutor’s strikes were race neutral and not pretextual | Strikes were purposefully discriminatory against African‑American jurors | Affirmed — proffered race‑neutral reasons accepted; no purposeful discrimination shown |
| Admission of co‑defendant statements (McCloud) under MRE 804(b)(3) | Statements were narrative, self‑inculpatory and admissible as against penal interest | Statements lacking indicia of reliability; implicated others | Affirmed — statements were part of a spontaneous narrative against declarants’ penal interest and admissible |
| Expert and cell‑record testimony (McCloud) | Experts qualified; summaries properly admitted | Experts unqualified; summaries/prejudicial texts unreliable | Affirmed — experts qualified; summaries admissible under MRE 1006; ambiguous texts not outcome‑determinative |
| Sufficiency of evidence as to Webster’s armed robbery/felony murder | Prosecution showed Webster agreed to plan, threatened/shot victim, and larcenous taking occurred or attempt occurred | No evidence Webster deprived victim or shared proceeds | Affirmed — statutory definition includes attempt/flight; testimony and circumstantial evidence sufficient |
| Late witness endorsement and discovery (Webster) | Prosecution showed good cause to add witness (Fain); no prejudice | Late endorsement denied fair trial | Affirmed — investigator made reasonable efforts; court provided time and investigator for defense; no prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (prohibition on race‑based peremptory strikes; three‑step Batson test)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- People v. Williams, 491 Mich. 164 (statutory scope of armed robbery includes attempts/flight)
- People v. Poole, 444 Mich. 151 (admissibility of accomplice statements against penal interest as narrative)
- People v. Lemmon, 456 Mich. 625 (great‑weight review and credibility issues)
- People v. Carines, 460 Mich. 750 (circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences standard for sufficiency)
- People v. Hardy, 494 Mich. 430 (sentencing findings review standard)