People v. Zajaczkowski
810 N.W.2d 627
Mich. Ct. App.2011Background
- Defendant pleads guilty to first-degree criminal sexual conduct with a conditional right to appeal whether undisputed facts support only third-degree liability.
- Victim is the daughter of the victim’s father from another relationship; defendant is born during his mother’s marriage to the victim’s father.
- Genetic testing later shows Walter is not defendant’s biological father, but the trial court and parties treated defendant as the victim’s potential half-sibling through the paternal line.
- The central legal issue is whether defendant is related to the victim by blood or affinity to the fourth degree for purposes of MCL 750.520b(1)(b)(ii).
- Presumptions of legitimacy arise because defendant was conceived and born during his mother’s marriage to the victim’s father; rebuttal requires clear and convincing evidence in proper proceedings.
- Court concludes defendant and victim are related by blood (brother and sister sharing the same father) and that defendant lacks standing to challenge paternity, affirming the trial court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is defendant related to the victim by blood or affinity to the fourth degree? | People: they are related by affinity or blood to the fourth degree. | Zajaczkowski: no current blood or affinity relationship; DNA shows not the father. | Yes; related by blood to the fourth degree. |
| Does defendant have standing to challenge his paternity? | People: presumption of legitimacy supports continuing relationship; defendant cannot rebut alone. | Zajaczkowski: may challenge paternity as a matter of right. | No; defendant lacks standing to challenge the presumption of legitimacy. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re KH, 469 Mich 621 (2004) (presumption of legitimacy rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence; standing limits)
- Barnes v Jeudevine, 475 Mich 696 (2006) (Paternity Act requires prior adjudication that child is not issue of the marriage)
- Girard v Wagenmaker, 437 Mich 231 (1991) (putative father lacks standing under Paternity Act to challenge legitimacy)
- Serafin v Serafin, 401 Mich 629 (1977) (abrogated Lord Mansfield’s Rule; presumption of legitimacy can be rebutted)