Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS


PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v WILLIAM ALBERT MEYER, Defendant-Appellant.

UNPUBLISHED March 15, 2005

No. 252801 Bay Circuit Court LC No. 03-010070-FC

Before: Hoekstra, P.J., and Neff and Schuette, JJ. PER CURIAM. Defendant was convicted of one count of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, MCL 750.520b(1)(a), for engaging in fellatio with his daughter, who was under the age of thirteen and a second count of first-degree criminal sexual conduct for engaging in fellatio with his son, who was also under the age of thirteen. Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of 210 to 450 months' imprisonment for his convictions. He appeals as of right. We affirm. In January 2002, defendant's wife, Terry Meyer, moved out of the family home and took her four children with her. Defendant was not the father of Terry's two older children. The victims were defendant's natural children, who were born during the marriage of Terry and defendant. Defendant's daughter was on born January 18, 1995, and his son was born on August 10, 1996. In February 2002, defendant began exercising scheduled visitation with the victims. He had visitation every weekend. Defendant's daughter testified that, during one visit, defendant called her into the bedroom. When she entered, he removed his pants and pulled down his underwear. He instructed her to "suck" his "private" between his legs. He pushed the back of her head down and put his penis into her mouth. After some time passed, defendant told the victim to stop sucking and get her brother to come to the bedroom. Defendant's daughter found her brother pretending to sleep on a couch and told him that defendant wanted him. Defendant's son testified that defendant asked him to open his mouth. When he did, defendant inserted his penis and "squishy" stuff came out of it. Defendant's son testified that he threw up after the incident. Like his sister, he confirmed that the incident occurred during a weekend visit.

-1-


Defendant's daughter additionally corroborated that defendant put his penis into his son's mouth. She peeked into the bedroom through a door crack and observed the incident. She described defendant's penis as "wiggly" when he was with his son. It was not straight like it was when she was with him. Defendant threatened both children, indicating that he would kill either their mother or one of their family members if they told anyone about his conduct. Defendant's mother and one of his neighbors testified that defendant was always with his parents during visits. He was never alone with the children unsupervised. Defendant, testifying on his own behalf, claimed that he was alone with the victims only during his first visit in February 2002. Thereafter, his parents came and stayed at his home every weekend to help with the victims. Defendant denied the victims' accusations and pointed out that he was injured in a work accident in July 2000. He had difficulty with mobility after a related surgery in January 2002. I Defendant first argues that the trial court erred in utilizing a non-random system of jury selection. The trial court conducted voir dire on twenty-one jurors at a time. Fourteen were seated in the jury box while seven others were seated in chairs. As jurors from the box were excused, the jurors from the chairs replaced those in the box. When the seven potential jurors from the chairs were "used up," seven more potential jurors would be called to the chairs. Defense counsel not only agreed to this type of selection process, but he expressed his preference for this type of selection, calling it a "more rational approach." MCR 2.511(A)(4) provides that counsel may agree to juror selection by "any other fair and impartial method" which differs from the random selection process set out in

Download PEOPLE OF MI V WILLIAM ALBERT MEYER.pdf

Michigan Law