Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS


PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v JEFFERY ALAN MEYERS, Defendant-Appellant.

UNPUBLISHED April 18, 2006

No. 259534 St. Clair Circuit Court LC No. 03-002613-FC

Before: Fort Hood, P.J., and Sawyer and Meter, JJ. PER CURIAM. Defendant Jeffery Alan Meyers appeals as of right from his conviction by a jury of three counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, MCL 750.520b. Defendant was sentenced as a second-offense habitual offender, MCL 769.10, to concurrent sentences of 15 to 40 years' imprisonment for each conviction. We affirm. This case arises from allegations that defendant repeatedly sexually molested his daughter, who was then a minor. Defendant argues on appeal that he was denied a fair trial by the improper introduction of other-acts evidence, including evidence that he used illegal drugs, evidence that he provided the complainant and other minors with alcohol and illegal drugs, and testimony from his ex-wife that in 1997 she discovered him masturbating and watching a pornographic film while the complainant slept next to him on the couch. Because defendant failed to properly preserve these issues for appeal,1 he must show that any error was plain and that it affected his substantial rights. People v Carines, 460 Mich 750, 763-764; 597 NW2d 130 (1999). MRE 404(b) governs the admission of other-bad-acts evidence. It provides, in part: (1) Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, scheme, plan, or system in doing an act, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident when the same is material, whether such other

1

Defendant did not object to the evidence on the grounds that it was improper bad-acts evidence.

-1-


crimes, wrongs, or acts are contemporaneous with, or prior or subsequent to the conduct at issue in the case. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible under MRE 404(b) if (1) the evidence is offered for a proper purpose and not to prove the defendant's character or propensity to commit the crime, (2) the evidence is relevant to an issue or fact of consequence at trial, and (3) the danger of unfair prejudice does not substantially outweigh the probative value of the evidence under MRE 403. People v VanderVliet, 444 Mich 52, 55, 74-75; 508 NW2d 114 (1993), amended 445 Mich 1205 (1994). MRE 404(b)(1) is a rule of inclusion that includes a nonexclusive list of grounds on which evidence may be admitted. People v Starr, 457 Mich 490, 496; 577 NW2d 673 (1998). MRE 404(b)(1) permits the admission of relevant evidence on any ground that does not risk impermissible inferences of character to conduct. Id.; VanderVliet, supra at 65. Further, a court must determine "whether the probative value [of the evidence] is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice." Starr, supra at 499 (emphasis in original). Notwithstanding MRE 404(b), evidence of other criminal acts can be admissible if they constitute part of the res gestae of the charged offense, i.e., if "the act or conduct evidence being introduced [is] offered for the purpose of explaining the circumstances leading up to the charged offense and [is] not offered to prove that [the] defendant, by virtue of his commission of the separate act, had committed the offense for which he was on trial." People v Bowers, 136 Mich App 284, 294; 356 NW2d 618 (1984). Our Supreme Court has held: "It is the nature of things that an event often does not occur singly and independently, isolated from all others, but, instead, is connected with some antecedent event from which the fact or event in question follows as an effect from a cause. When such is the case and the antecedent event incidentally involves the commission of another crime, the principle that the jury is entitled to hear the `complete story' ordinarily supports the admission of such evidence. State v Villavicencio, 95 Ariz 199; 388 P2d 245 (1964); People v Wardwell, 167 Cal App 2d 566; 334 P2d 641 (1959); McCormick on Evidence (2d ed),

Download PEOPLE OF MI V JEFFERY ALAN MEYERS.pdf

Michigan Law