People v. Strickland, 293 Mich. App. 393

Strickland was convicted by jury of first-degree home invasion, assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder, felon in possession of a firearm, felonious assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony; he was sentenced as a fourth-offense habitual offender to concurrent terms plus a consecutive firearm term; the convictions arose from invading the Clarkson home and Strickland’s attempt to take Arlis Clarkson’s gun during an altercation that discharged the weapon, injuring Arlis.
Strickland admitted invading the Clarksons’ home but claimed he did not possess Arlis’s gun during the struggle.
The trial court denied Strickland’s request for new counsel on the first day of trial; the court conducted an inquiry into counsel’s adequacy and the grounds for substitution.
On sufficiency, the court held the evidence supported the firearm/dangerous-weapon elements and joint possession of the gun during the assault could be inferred from Strickland’s actions, even if possession was contested.
Strickland challenged dual convictions for assault with intent to injure and felonious assault as double jeopardy; the court applied the same-elements test and rejected the claim, citing controlling Michigan authority.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying new counsel	Strickland argues breakdown warranted substitute counsel	Court's inquiry showed no good cause; strategy decisions reside with counsel	No abuse; denial affirmed.
Whether evidence was sufficient to prove possession and weapon elements	Strickland never possessed the gun	Evidence showed joint possession/possession via control during struggle	Sufficient evidence supported possession and gun-related convictions.
Whether dual convictions for assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder and felonious assault violated double jeopardy	Two convictions improper	Elements differ; no double jeopardy violation	No double jeopardy violation; convictions affirmed.

People v Traylor, 245 Mich App 460; 628 NW2d 120 (2001) (2001) (grievance against counsel insufficient alone to warrant new counsel)
People v Yost, 278 Mich App 341; 749 NW2d 753 (2008) (2008) (standard for substitution and effectiveness of counsel)
People v Bauder, 269 Mich App 174; 712 NW2d 506 (2005) (2005) (counsel's decisions are trial strategy; no substitution for mere disagreement)
People v Otler, 51 Mich App 256; 214 NW2d 727 (1974) (1974) (counsel substitution analysis guidance)