People v. Meissner
294 Mich. App. 438
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Worthington reported defendant, with whom she had a relationship, had escalated abuse including door damage, threats, a past choking incident, and other physical harm.
- Worthington gave police a statement detailing threats and prior assaults; prosecutor sought to admit those statements under MCL 768.27c.
- Defendant moved to suppress Worthington’s August/November statements; the court allowed suppression of the August incident but denied suppression of November statements.
- At trial, Worthington recanted or recast many statements, claiming embellishment; she testified defendant never beat or threatened her, casting credibility questions on prior statements.
- Defendant was charged with second-offense domestic violence, first-degree home invasion, and obstruction of justice; the jury ultimately convicted him on all counts.
- The trial court admitted prior-acts evidence under MCL 768.27b and admitted the November statements under MCL 768.27c; defendant appeals on evidentiary and sufficiency grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of police statements under 27c | Worthington’s statements fit 27c(l)(a) and were made near the time of threats. | Statements were improperly admitted due to timing and lack of trustworthiness. | Admissible; timing and trustworthiness satisfied 27c; statements described threats and were near the time of injury. |
| Trustworthiness under 27c(2) | Statements corroborated by other evidence; not solely self-serving. | No corroboration or indicia of trustworthiness. | Admissibility upheld; corroboration and flexible trustworthiness analysis supported. |
| Admissibility of prior acts under 27b | Other acts of domestic violence probative to relationship dynamics and credibility. | Acts differed from the charged offense and risked undue prejudice. | Admissible; probative value outweighed prejudice; relevant to relationship context. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence for assault and related charges | Throwing coins and pushing Worthington constituted offensive touching and assault. | Evidence insufficient to prove assault beyond reasonable doubt. | Sufficient evidence; a rational trier of fact could find assault, home invasion, and related elements. |
| Obstruction of justice evidence | Harassing texts referencing police investigation supported obstruction. | Text messages improper for evidence of obstruction. | Sufficient evidence; messages could be found to willfully obstruct a proper investigation. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Pattison, 276 Mich App 613 (Mich App 2007) (addressing 768.27c admissibility and domestic-violence hearsay)
- People v Roper, 286 Mich App 77 (Mich App 2009) (statutory interpretation; abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- People v Feezel, 486 Mich 184 (Mich 2010) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary decisions)
- People v Swafford, 483 Mich 1 (Mich 2009) (de novo interpretation of statutory provisions; trustworthiness considerations)
- People v Peltola, 489 Mich 174 (Mich 2011) (statutory construction to give effect to text as a whole)
- People v Gardner, 482 Mich 41 (Mich 2008) (interpretation of evidence rules in conjunction with text)
- People v Graves, 458 Mich 476 (Mich 1998) (jury instructions and credibility considerations)
- People v Dalessandro, 165 Mich App 569 (Mich App 1988) (improper appeal to sympathy in closing arguments; evidentiary boundaries)
- People v Boske, 221 Mich 129 (Mich 1922) (prohibition on vouching by prosecutor; credibility arguments)