Defendant-Cope – Sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions of torture & unlawful imprisonment; MCL 750.85; “Cruel” & “custody or physical control” defined; MCL 750.85(2)(a) & (b); “Severe mental pain or suffering” defined; MCL 750.85(2); MCL 750.349b(1); People v. Bosca; Aiding & abetting; MCL 767.39; People v. Plunkett; “Duress” jury instruction; People v. Lemons; People v. Williams; People v. Carines; Joinder of trials; MCR 6.121; MCL 768.5; People v. Hana; People v. Harris; “Severance”; MCR 6.121(C); Inconsistent positions in the trial & appellate courts; Blazer Foods, Inc. v. Restaurant Props., Inc.; Ineffective assistance of counsel; Failure to object to the joint trial; Strickland v. Washington; People v. Grant; Trial strategy; Challenges to the exclusion of part of a victim’s testimony; People v. Dobek; MRE 602; MRE 701; Right to present a defense; People v. King; Defendant-Sadowski – Right to confrontation; People v. Fackelman; MCL 763.1; Bruton v. United States; People v. Banks; Richardson v. Marsh; Harmless error; People v. Dendel; Handgun evidence; MRE 401-403; People v. McGhee; MRE 404(b); People v. Mardlin; People v. VanderVliet

The court held that there was sufficient evidence supporting defendant-Cope’s convictions and reversal was not warranted based on the jury instructions, the joinder of the two trials, or the exclusion of evidence. He also was not denied the effective assistance of counsel or entitled to a remand. The court reviewed all his remaining claims and found them to be without merit. However, it held that defendant-Sadowski’s confrontation rights were violated, and the violation was not harmless. Thus, he was entitled to a new trial. Further, upon retrial, evidence as to the handgun should not be admitted. Cope was convicted of two counts of torture and two counts of unlawful imprisonment. Sadowski was convicted of solicitation to commit murder, two counts of torture, two counts of unlawful imprisonment, and two counts of assault by strangulation. Cope highlighted “the events that occurred upstairs, with Sadowski initiating the violence and leading the victims downstairs at sword point.” He seemed “to ignore the fact that the prosecution advanced an aiding and abetting theory at trial.” Victims A and B gave detailed testimony as to “the frightful events that occurred in the basement of the gym.” According to A and B, “the minute they entered the basement, Cope immediately jumped to do Sadowski’s bidding. Cope either duct taped them to the poles or assisted Sadowski in doing so.” According to them, “the ensuing events were filled with repeated physical abuse and threats of murder.” Both testified that “Sadowski smashed their heads into the poles, threatened to kill them, choked them multiple times until they lost consciousness, and continually beat them throughout the night.” Cope focused on evidence that he “offered the victims Xanax, gave them food, helped them urinate, and acted in a somewhat kinder manner when Sadowski was not in the room. Simply because Cope was the nicer of the two captors did not negate the jury’s finding of guilt.” As to Sadowski, the court concluded that the testimony about Cope’s unredacted police statements “‘expressly implicated’” Sadowski and violated his confrontation rights. Further, the error was not harmless. This “was not a case with overwhelming evidence of guilt. It comes down to being a case of ‘he said, she said.’ There was significant exculpatory evidence.” Cope’s convictions were affirmed and Sadowski’s convictions were vacated.