Ineffective assistance of counsel; People v. Muhammad; People v. Payne; Sufficiency of the evidence; Second-degree murder; MCL 750.317; People v. Werner; People v. Goecke; Intent; People v. Bosca; Evidence of a decedent’s failure to use a seat belt; People v. Moore; Operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI) causing death; Driving a motor vehicle without a valid license (DWLS) causing death; Blood alcohol content (BAC); 11-carboxytetrahydrocannabinol (THC)

The court held that defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel, that the prosecution presented sufficient evidence of malice for a reasonable jury to convict her of second-degree murder, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by granting the prosecution’s pretrial motion in limine to exclude evidence that the victim was not wearing a seat belt. She was convicted of second-degree murder, OWI causing death, DWLS causing death, and reckless driving causing death. The trial court sentenced her to 27 to 50 years for the murder conviction, and 10 to 15 years for each of the other convictions. On appeal, the court rejected her argument that defense counsel performed ineffectively when he failed to call as a witness the passenger of her vehicle, obtain call logs to show that she called 911 while being followed by a U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer who witnessed the accident, produce a certified copy of a U.S. Customs Directive for admission into evidence, and adequately prepare for trial. It found that she “failed to overcome the presumption that defense counsel employed effective strategy by not calling the passenger as a witness,” and failed to show that counsel performed ineffectively by not obtaining her cell phone and 911 call records and by not adequately preparing for trial. It also found that defense counsel was not ineffective for failing to present a certified copy of the Directive, noting that the jury was presented with the same information that would have been obtained from the Directive. She could not show “either that defense counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness or that, but for any error, there is a reasonable probability that the result of her trial would have been different.” The court next held that there was sufficient evidence of malice to support her second-degree murder conviction. “[F]rom the evidence produced at trial that defendant, with a BAC nearly twice the legal limit and THC in her system, caused a minor accident from which she fled before driving almost 70 mph through a residential intersection in the rain, ignoring a stop sign, and hitting [the victim’s] FedEx van, a reasonable jury could infer that she possessed the intent ‘to do an act in wanton and wilful disregard of the likelihood that the natural tendency of such behavior is to cause death or great bodily harm.’” Finally, it held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by granting the prosecution’s pretrial motion in limine to exclude evidence that the victim was not wearing a seat belt at the time of the collision. Affirmed.