e-Journal Summary

e-Journal Number : 84506
Opinion Date : 10/13/2025
e-Journal Date : 10/22/2025
Court : Michigan Court of Appeals
Case Name : People v. Jones
Practice Area(s) : Criminal Law
Judge(s) : Per Curiam – Gadola, Murray, and Yates
Full PDF Opinion
Issues:

Sufficiency of the evidence for felonious assault (MCL 750.82) & felony-firearm (MCL 750.227b) convictions; Principle that a felonious assault conviction does not require an actual injury; People v Garnes; Physical evidence

Summary

Holding that there was sufficient evidence to support defendant’s felonious assault and felony-firearm convictions, the court affirmed. He argued there was no physical evidence to support his convictions. The court disagreed, concluding the “prosecution presented physical evidence and witness testimony to prove the elements of felonious assault and felony-firearm beyond a reasonable doubt. The victim testified that, during an argument between her and defendant, [he] put a small gun to her head and threatened her. The victim called 911.” Police detained defendant about 30 minutes later. He “admitted he had a gun in the car, and the police found a .22 caliber pistol in the car.” He contended on appeal that “the victim’s testimony was confusing and difficult to follow.” But the court found that her “testimony was clear that defendant put a gun to her head, and her testimony was consistent with what she told the police. The evidence established that defendant committed an assault with a gun without intending to commit murder or to inflict great bodily harm less than murder.” It also established that he “possessed a firearm when committing a felony.” Although he was “correct that the police did not test for DNA or lift fingerprints from the gun, that is not necessary for a jury to find defendant committed a felonious assault with the gun. The gun was found in” his possession 30 “minutes after the victim called 911 in response to the assault. The jury reasonably inferred that the gun found in defendant’s car was the same gun he assaulted the victim with.” He further argued “that because the prosecution did not introduce any evidence of an injury, there was insufficient evidence to convict him of felonious assault. However, injury is not an element of felonious assault, so the prosecutor was not required to introduce any evidence of an injury.”

Full PDF Opinion