C People of Michigan v. Anthony Jeffrey Vogel

Michigan Court of Appeals

C People of Michigan v. Anthony Jeffrey Vogel

DecidedSeptember 28, 2023

Docket359936

StatusUnpublished

This text of C People of Michigan v. Anthony Jeffrey Vogel (C People of Michigan v. Anthony Jeffrey Vogel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

C People of Michigan v. Anthony Jeffrey Vogel, (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports.

STATE OF MICHIGAN

COURT OF APPEALS

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, UNPUBLISHED September 28, 2023 Plaintiff-Appellee,

v No. 359936 Ogemaw Circuit Court ANTHONY JEFFREY VOGEL, LC No. 19-005320-FH

Defendant-Appellant.

Before: SHAPIRO, P.J., and M. J. KELLY and CAMERON, JJ.

SHAPIRO, P.J. (concurring).

I concur in affirming defendant’s convictions and sentences.1 I write separately to urge the Supreme Court to reexamine its holding in People v Watkins, 491 Mich 450; 818 NW2d 296 (2012), that MCL 768.27a does not violate separation-of-power principles. This holding was supported by the Court’s conclusion that, despite the admissibility provided MCL 768.27a, a defendant was still shielded from overly-prejudicial evidence under MRE 403. See Watkins, 491 Mich at 481-491. In practice, however, evidence meeting the statutory criteria is rarely, if ever, excluded pursuant to MRE 403. The likely reason is that the fundamental prejudice arising from such evidence is that it constitutes propensity evidence, but per Watkins, “when applying MRE 403 to evidence admissible under MCL 768.27a, courts must weigh the propensity inference in favor of the evidence’s probative value rather than its prejudicial effect.” Watkins, 491 Mich at 487. I also believe that the Supreme Court should review this Court’s holding in People v Payne, 304 Mich App 667, 676; 850 NW2d 601 (2014), that the 25-year mandatory minimum prescribed by MCL 750.520b(2)(b) does not constitute cruel or unusual punishment as applied to juvenile offenders. The Supreme Court has not yet addressed this issue, and in light of People v Parks, 510

1 While I disagree with the majority that defendant’s statements to the police denying the accusations were properly excluded, I conclude that any error on this matter was harmless. I agree with the majority opinion in all other respects.

-1- Mich 225; 987 NW2d 161 (2022), mandatory lengthy sentences of minors are of questionable constitutionality.

/s/ Douglas B. Shapiro

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports.

STATE OF MICHIGAN

COURT OF APPEALS

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, UNPUBLISHED September 28, 2023 Plaintiff-Appellee,

v No. 359936 Ogemaw Circuit Court ANTHONY JEFFREY VOGEL, LC No. 19-005320-FH

Defendant-Appellant.

Before: SHAPIRO, P.J., and M. J. KELLY and CAMERON, JJ.

SHAPIRO, P.J. (concurring).

I concur in affirming defendant’s convictions and sentences.1 I write separately to urge the Supreme Court to reexamine its holding in People v Watkins, 491 Mich 450; 818 NW2d 296 (2012), that MCL 768.27a does not violate separation-of-power principles. This holding was supported by the Court’s conclusion that, despite the admissibility provided MCL 768.27a, a defendant was still shielded from overly-prejudicial evidence under MRE 403. See Watkins, 491 Mich at 481-491. In practice, however, evidence meeting the statutory criteria is rarely, if ever, excluded pursuant to MRE 403. The likely reason is that the fundamental prejudice arising from such evidence is that it constitutes propensity evidence, but per Watkins, “when applying MRE 403 to evidence admissible under MCL 768.27a, courts must weigh the propensity inference in favor of the evidence’s probative value rather than its prejudicial effect.” Watkins, 491 Mich at 487. I also believe that the Supreme Court should review this Court’s holding in People v Payne, 304 Mich App 667, 676; 850 NW2d 601 (2014), that the 25-year mandatory minimum prescribed by MCL 750.520b(2)(b) does not constitute cruel or unusual punishment as applied to juvenile offenders. The Supreme Court has not yet addressed this issue, and in light of People v Parks, 510

1 While I disagree with the majority that defendant’s statements to the police denying the accusations were properly excluded, I conclude that any error on this matter was harmless. I agree with the majority opinion in all other respects.

-1- Mich 225; 987 NW2d 161 (2022), mandatory lengthy sentences of minors are of questionable constitutionality.

/s/ Douglas B. Shapiro

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

C People of Michigan v. Anthony Jeffrey Vogel, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/c-people-of-michigan-v-anthony-jeffrey-vogel-michctapp-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack