Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Mann

April 8, 2010

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
JACOB PAUL MANN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



Berrien Circuit Court LC Nos. 2008-402310-FC & 2008-402311-FC.

Per curiam.

FOR PUBLICATION

Before: TALBOT, P.J., and WHITBECK and OWENS, JJ.

Following a consolidated trial, the jury convicted defendant Jacob Mann of three counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC I),*fn1 and one count of second-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC II).*fn2 The trial court sentenced Mann to 15 to 50 years' imprisonment for each of the three convictions for CSC I and to 4 to 15 years' imprisonment for the CSC II conviction, with credit for 156 days, the sentences to run concurrently. Mann appeals as of right. We affirm.

I. BASIC FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

R.B., one of the victims in this case, was eight years old at the time of the offense. He lived with his 18-year-old brother, P.P., and their mother in a two-bedroom apartment in Berrien County. P.P. slept in one of the bedrooms and their mother slept in the other bedroom. R.B. used what was designed as a dining room for his bedroom. There were bunk beds in this room.

J.B., another victim in this case, who was six years old and lived on the same street, sometimes played and spent the night with R.B. Mann, who was 17 years old at the time of the offenses, was one of P.P.'s friends. Mann was often at R.B. and P.P.'s apartment playing video games with P.P. and frequently spent the night. When J.B. spent the night at the apartment, R.B. would usually sleep in one of the bunk beds and J.B. would sleep in the other. If J.B. was not spending the night, R.B. would sleep in one of the bunk beds and Mann would sometimes sleep in the other. Because R.B. and P.P.'s mother worked during the day and sometimes on the weekend, there were times when Mann was at the apartment without her being there.

The last time Mann spent the night at the apartment was in early March 2008. On March 10, 2008, R.B. began wanting to sleep with his mother all the time. R.B. told his mother that he felt safer sleeping with her. R.B. also told his mother that he did not want Mann spending the night anymore. When his mother asked why, R.B. stated that Mann touched him "badly." When asked to explain, R.B. indicated that Mann put his "front" in R.B.'s "behind" and that Mann used lotion when he did this. R.B. also indicated that Mann made R.B. "suck him," and Mann sucked R.B. as well. At trial, R.B. specifically testified that Mann did "[b]ad things" to him every time that Mann came over to the apartment. These bad things happened in R.B.'s bedroom, in the bathroom, and in the front room. In addition, R.B. testified that when J.B. spent the night, R.B. saw Mann sucking J.B. in the top bunk bed when R.B. got up to go to the bathroom. J.B. testified at trial that Mann touched his penis with his hand on more than one occasion, but did not testify to any other sexual contact.

In response to R.B.'s disclosure to her, R.B.'s mother took him to the hospital for an examination. The examining physician found redness around R.B.'s anus and a small, superficial abrasion about two millimeters long on his anus. R.B.'s mother also recalled that within a month and a half before R.B. made his disclosure, she looked at R.B.'s anus in response to his complaints of pain, and she noticed redness around his anus, but at the time, she presumed it was a heat rash.

While being interviewed by the police, Mann indicated that he played video games at R.B. and P.P.'s apartment, but denied that the alleged crimes occurred. Mann did not testify at trial. A jury subsequently convicted Mann of three counts of CSC I and one count of CSC II as set forth above.

II. PRIOR BAD ACT

A. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Mann argues that his due process rights were violated because the trial court admitted a prior bad act that likely prejudiced the jury. We review for an abuse of discretion a trial court's decision to admit or exclude evidence.*fn3 Where the admission of evidence ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.