Sufficiency of the evidence to bind defendant over; People v. Bennett; People v. Cervi; Probable cause; People v. Shami; People v. Greene; First-degree murder; People v. Oros; MCL 750.316(1)(a); Premeditation & deliberation; People v. Plummer; Felon in possession (FIP); People v. Tice; MCL 750.224f; Felony-firearm; People v. Dillard; MCL 750.227b; Motion to quash the bindover; People v. Norwood

Holding that there was sufficient evidence produced at the preliminary exam to show probable cause to bind defendant over on the first-degree murder, FIP, and felony-firearm charges, the court reversed the circuit court’s order granting his motion to quash the bindover and dismiss the charges. It remanded for reinstatement of the district court’s bindover order and further proceedings. The evidence at the preliminary exam showed that defendant was with the victim (B) when B was initially shot, they were together while making phone calls to B’s cousin (M) using defendant’s cell phone, that cell phone was used in an area that included where B’s body was later found, defendant accurately described B’s wounds, and he lied about where he had left B. The court held that this evidence, taken as a whole, was sufficient to establish “probable cause to believe that defendant intentionally killed” B. As to the specific intent element, he and B “knew each other well enough that defendant’s cell phone number was entered in” B’s cell phone under the nickname “Ice.” The evidence suggested that they left in defendant’s car, and B was still alive for several minutes while he used defendant’s cell phone to talk to M. When B’s “body was found, he had been shot six times from behind and once in the head from the front.” Photos presented at the preliminary exam indicated that the area where his “body was found was somewhat remote, and one shell casing was found near” his body. This evidence was consistent with the prosecution’s theory that defendant purposefully shot B several times, then drove the wounded B “to a different location before fatally shooting” him, on the way allowing him to talk to M to instruct M not to tell that B was with defendant. After killing B, he used the same cell phone to instruct M not to reveal that defendant had been with B, and to tell both M and later B’s mother “incorrect and inconsistent information about [B’s] condition and location.” The evidence of his behavior before and after B was killed suggested “both premeditation and deliberation.” The same evidence that established probable cause to bind him over on the murder charge also supported binding him over on the FIP and felony-firearm charges.