[ad_1]
After two guilty verdicts for the parents of the Oxford High School shooter, defense attorneys are already turning their eyes to the appeals they see as inevitable.
Appeals can’t be filed until after sentencing, which is April 9 for both James and Jennifer Crumbley. They were convicted by separate juries of four counts each of involuntary manslaughter in connection with their son’s mass shooting at Oxford High School in November 2021 that left four students dead — Hana St. Juliana, 14; Madisyn Baldwin, 17; Tate Myre, 16; and Justin Shilling, 17.
The cases were unprecedented, marking the first time parents of a school shooter have been charged with involuntary manslaughter. Just as they were tried individually, their appeals will be separate as well.
Neither James’ attorney, Mariell Lehman, or Jennifer’s attorney, Shannon Smith, have commented on their clients’ case outside of court. A gag order put in place by Oakland County Circuit Judge Cheryl Matthews was lifted after James’ verdict Thursday night.
Birmingham attorney Patrick Barone said it’s a common misconception that people can appeal just because they think the jury got it wrong. There has to be procedural mistakes, errors in how the judge interpreted the law or prosecutorial misconduct to file an appeal, he said.
Barone said appeals attorneys should be cautious, because if the rulings go the wrong way, it could make bad law. There’s no real precedent being set right now, he said, as there is only a circuit court case that went to trial. But once the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court issue a ruling, that becomes the law, and it could expand parental culpability in ways that have not been explored in courts.
“There’s an old adage in the criminal justice and legal system that hard cases make bad law,” Barone said. “This was definitely that kind of case for a lot of reasons.”
Southfield-based attorney Stuart Freidman echoed that adage. He said cases tend to domino and they can set dangerous precedents.
What appeals could be filed
Former U.S. Attorney Matthew Schneider, a Honigman law firm partner, said one issue for a potential appeal is if Matthews, the judge, should have allowed evidence about what happened after the shooting, Schneider said.
“The case is really about what did the parents know prior to the shooting,” Schneider said.
Lehman and Smith both made this argument during the trials as well.
Barone said he would expect appeals based on the decisions Matthews made on allowing evidence to be presented at the trial, including the graphic surveillance footage of the shooting, the shooter’s journal entries and texts to his friend about his mental health. He also expects there will be an appeal based on the shooter and his doctors not being able to testify, something Smith, Jennifer Crumbley’s attorney, fought to have in her client’s trial.
Freidman said he was “disturbed” that Matthews allowed prosecutors to show the shooter’s journal entries without having him take the stand to be cross-examined about them.
Smith and Lehman also claimed there were inconsistencies in the shooter’s statements to medical professionals noted in records that were protected by confidentiality laws that the shooter refused to waive. But Matthews did a review of the records and said there were not inconsistencies.
Barone and Friedman both said they see Matthews deciding to allow prosecutors to show sometimes-graphic surveillance footage of the shooting as an appealable issue.
“From a broad perspective, the judge’s role is really two things — to determine the law that applies in jury instructions and to decide what to include or exclude from evidence,” Barone said. “Did the judge get the law wrong? Did the judge get the rules of evidence wrong? If I think the answer is yes, then I have a basis for an appeal.”
Detroit-based attorney Jon Marko said the Crumbleys could also appeal based on the fact that they believe these charges never should have been brought in the first place, because it’s not possible the jury could legally find them guilty of involuntary manslaughter with the facts of the case.
“I do think that our appeals court and perhaps our Supreme Court is going to take a look at this very closely,” Marko said. “It involves application of legal theories that have never been applied in this way before.”
But Schneider isn’t convinced just because the case is making new ground that it automatically is an appellate issue.
“Just because it’s used in new and different ways, it doesn’t mean that it’s an improper use of the law,” Schneider said. “It would be very difficult to overcome something like that on appeal.”
Even if the appeals courts disagree on the judge allowing the evidence in, it might not be enough to overturn the conviction, Marko said.
“An appeal based on evidentiary rulings is very, very difficult,” Marko said. “The appeals court can say, ‘We think the trial judge maybe should not have let this in. It is probably not how we would’ve ruled if we were sitting on the trial court, but nevertheless it’s not so bad of a decision that we’re not going to overturn it.'”
Chances of succeeding in appeal low
Very few people succeed on an appeal, all four defense attorneys said.
“If I’m the appellate attorney, I’m not looking at one thing,” Barone said. “I’m saying all of these mistakes together are such that the Court of Appeals has no alternative but to reverse it and let a different jury look at it with the law and with the evidence being corrected.”
But an appeals court granting a new trial and reversing the verdict is rare, Barone said.
“A very small percentage of criminal appeals are granted in a way that results in a reversal or a new trial,” Barone said. “More frequently, they find the judge did make errors, but it was not enough to reverse the verdict and get a new trial.”
Marko said the Crumbleys have a very minuscule chance of succeeding, though they have a higher chance than the average criminal defendant because it’s the first time a case like this has been charged.
“Certainly there’s always a chance of success,” Marko said. “Do I think the odds are in their favor? Absolutely not. Any time you’re appealing a criminal conviction, only a very small percentage of those convictions will be overturned on appeal.”
Appeals process likely to take years
The appeals process is slow, Barone said. Each appeal — to the Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court — will likely take one to two years, he said.
Schneider said the courts have rules on how long defendants have to file appeals and responses, but once the case is with the court, “they set their own time frame.”
Sentence appeals
The Crumbleys also would be able to appeal their sentence, once Matthews decides what she will give them. Sentencing guidelines are no longer mandatory to follow in Michigan, so Matthews could sentence them to up to 15 years.
Marko said he has a feeling the sentences will be at the top end of the guidelines given the impact on the community and the egregiousness of the case.
“There’s a tremendous amount of public pressure for this tragedy for people to be held accountable,” Marko said. “I think it could run over into sentencing.”
kberg@detroitnews.com
[ad_2]
Read More: Appeals likely for the Crumbley parents. What claims may they make?
