People of Michigan v. Willie Lee Simms
333198
| Mich. Ct. App. | Oct 31, 2017Background
- Defendant Willie Lee Simms was convicted by a jury of second-degree murder for the December 10, 2015 shooting death of Ernest Tye in Tye’s Detroit duplex and sentenced to 22–40 years’ imprisonment.
- Prosecution theory: Simms acted as a lookout while two associates (Lawrence Stafford and Travone Wilson) entered the upstairs unit and Stafford shot the victim; eyewitnesses placed Simms at the duplex before and immediately after the shooting.
- Key eyewitnesses: Henric Hayes (downstairs tenant) testified he saw Simms armed with a 9mm near the entryway and later heard gunshots; Charles Deen and Mark Eddins similarly identified Simms near the scene and running from it.
- Defense theory: misidentification and alibi; Simms testified he was elsewhere and relied on a time-stamped Facebook post and lack of his DNA at the scene.
- Trial and appellate posture: conviction affirmed by Michigan Court of Appeals; main appellate issues were sufficiency of the evidence on identity, ineffective assistance for failure to object to OV scoring, and pro se Standard 4 arguments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove identity | Eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence place Simms at the duplex as lookout; identifications were positive | Misidentification, testimonial inconsistencies, lack of DNA/fingerprint evidence, credible alibi supported by Facebook timestamp | Affirmed — viewing evidence in prosecution’s favor, eyewitness ID and circumstantial proof were sufficient to support conviction |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel re: OV 3 scoring | Correct OV scoring (50 points) was applied by court; guidelines properly calculated | Counsel was ineffective for not objecting to trial court’s 50-point score (should be 25) for OV 3 | No prejudice shown — even with correct 25 points, Simms’ OV level and grid placement would not change; no resentencing warranted |
| Impact of OV scoring error on sentence | Guidelines range as calculated justified sentence | Scoring error allegedly increased OV total and affected guidelines | No relief — scoring error did not alter applicable guidelines range; outcome unchanged |
| Pro se Standard 4 claims challenging evidence credibility | Evidence was credible and sufficient | Re-raised sufficiency/credibility claims; challenged reliability of IDs | Denied — claims reiterate sufficiency arguments already rejected; no basis for relief |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Lueth, 253 Mich. App. 670 (appellate standard for sufficiency review)
- People v. Reese, 491 Mich. 127 (sufficiency review and reasonable-inferences standard)
- People v. Nowack, 462 Mich. 392 (circumstantial evidence and appellate deference)
- People v. Davis, 241 Mich. App. 697 (eyewitness identification may support conviction)
- People v. Nix, 301 Mich. App. 195 (ineffective assistance — prejudice standard)
- People v. Francisco, 474 Mich. 82 (harmlessness of guideline-scoring errors affecting range)
- People v. Houston, 473 Mich. 399 (correct OV 3 scoring when homicide is sentencing offense)