Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS


PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v KEYAIN CORY TOPLIN, Defendant-Appellant.

UNPUBLISHED January 10, 2008

No. 273370 Wayne Circuit Court LC No. 06-005560-01

Before: Fitzgerald, P.J., and Markey and Smolenski, JJ. PER CURIAM. Defendant was found guilty at a bench trial of carjacking, MCL 750.529a, kidnapping (two counts), MCL 750.349, assault with intent to rob while armed, MCL 750.89, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, MCL 750.227b. He was sentenced to concurrent prison terms of 7-12 years for the carjacking, kidnapping, and assault convictions, plus 2 years' consecutive imprisonment for the felony-firearm conviction. He appeals as of right. We affirm. On March 1, 2006, the victims met with a man to purchase Cartier sunglasses. They followed the man to two locations before going to a park where defendant came up to their car. The victims initially thought defendant was going to show them the glasses while inside the car. But once in the car, defendant pointed a gun at them and told them to give him all their money. The victims gave defendant very little money. When defendant continued to demand money, one of the victims suggested he could get money from an automated teller machine. Defendant then pointed the gun at the other victim and directed him to drive the car first to a bank ATM, and then to a gas station ATM. Both attempts to get money from the ATMs were unsuccessful. Thereafter, defendant instructed the victims to drive to a nearby alley. Once in the alley, defendant directed them to get out of the car, remove their clothes, and put the items on the passenger seat. With only their undergarments still on, defendant ordered the victims to run down the alley. Defendant then drove away in the car. One victim went to a nearby aunt's house, and the other went through a yard where a stranger stopped him and gave him some clothes. The stranger flagged down a police car that was around the corner. That victim then told the police what happened. The other victim went to the police the day after the incident and reported what had happened. Approximately one -1-


month later, the victims identified defendant from photographic lineups, which were conducted a couple days apart. According to defendant's trial testimony, on the day of the events in question, he met the victims at the park because they wanted to purchase a pound of marijuana from him as they had done in the past. He claimed he took money from the victims that they owed for a previous drug purchase but denied committing any of the offenses for which he was changed. At trial, defendant was questioned about an ex-girlfriend who was listed as an alibi witness, but who was not called to testify. The prosecutor asked defendant what that alibi witness was supposed to testify to. The trial court sustained defense counsel's objection to the question, stating: [O]f course he's not going to admit here on the stand that he told somebody to lie for him so the best thing that could happen is you'll get him to say that he said one thing and then you may claim entitlement to call that person in and are you really going to want to take that

Download PEOPLE OF MI V KEYAIN CORY TOPLIN.pdf

Michigan Law