Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v STACEY L. WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

UNPUBLISHED May 21, 2009

No. 283375 Wayne Circuit Court LC No. 07-009110-FC

Before: Servitto, P.J., and O'Connell and Zahra, JJ. PER CURIAM. Defendant appeals as of right his bench trial convictions of two counts of armed robbery, MCL 750.529, and one count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, MCL 750.227b. Defendant was sentenced to concurrent prison terms of 11 to 20 years for each robbery conviction, to be served consecutive to a two-year term of imprisonment for the felonyfirearm conviction. Because there was sufficient evidence to convict defendant, his sentences were constitutional, the photographic lineup was proper, and defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel, we affirm. Defendant was convicted of robbing William Rice and Cheryl Sanford at an ATM. Rice and Sanford both testified that while seated in their vehicle at a drive-through ATM, two men approached them with guns, demanding their money and Ms. Sanford's purse. After the victims handed over the items, the robbers jumped into a nearby red car. Mr. Rice shot several times at the red vehicle, but it was able to get away. I. Sufficiency of the Evidence Defendant first argues that there was insufficient evidence to identify him as one of the robbers. We disagree. In People v Williams, 268 Mich App 416, 419; 707 NW2d 624 (2005), this Court explained: We review claims of insufficient evidence de novo. When ascertaining whether sufficient evidence was presented at trial to support a conviction, this Court must view the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and determine whether a rational trier of fact could find that the essential elements of the crime were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This Court will not interfere with the trier of fact's role of determining the weight of the evidence or the -1-

credibility of witnesses. Circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences that arise from such evidence can constitute satisfactory proof of the elements of the crime. All conflicts in the evidence must be resolved in favor of the prosecution. [Citations omitted.] At trial, Sanford positively identified defendant as one of the robbers. Further, Rice and Sanford identified the robbers' vehicle as a red Beretta, and Rice stated that he saw a white baseball cap on the back window ledge. Rice also testified that he fired a gun at the vehicle as it was leaving. Defendant owned a red Beretta and when his car was discovered a few days after the robbery, it had a shattered windshield and apparent bullet damage to a rear-view mirror, and a white baseball cap was on the back window ledge. This evidence, viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient to establish defendant's identity as one of the robbers beyond a reasonable doubt. The credibility of the identification testimony was for the trial court, as the trier of fact, to determine. People v Crump, 216 Mich App 210, 215; 549 NW2d 36 (1996). II. Defendant's Sentences Defendant next argues that his sentences of 11 to 20 years each for the robbery convictions violate the constitutional prohibitions against cruel or unusual punishment. US Const, Am VIII; Const 1963, art 1,

Download PEOPLE OF MI V STACEY L WILLIAMS.pdf

Michigan Law