Hearsay; MRE 801 & MRE 802; People v Chambers; Right of confrontation; People v Dendel (On Second Remand); Ineffective assistance of counsel

The court held that the challenged officer testimony was not inadmissible hearsay, did not violate defendant’s right of confrontation, and counsel was not ineffective. He was convicted of first-degree premeditated murder, FIP, CCW, and felony-firearm (second offense) arising from the fatal shooting of the victim outside a residence after he traveled from Flint to Detroit with a driver who later testified that he saw him shoot the victim. The trial court sentenced defendant to life imprisonment for the murder conviction and lesser concurrent and consecutive sentences for the remaining convictions. On appeal, the court held that the officer’s testimony about what three scene witnesses reported was properly admitted because the statements were offered “not for their truth, but rather, to show what the police did after receiving the information,” and “[a] statement offered to show why police officers acted as they did is not hearsay.” On appeal, the court also held there was no violation of his confrontation right because “the Confrontation Clause does not bar the use of out-of-court testimonial statements for purposes other than establishing the truth of the matter asserted,” and the testimony was used to explain investigative steps rather than prove the truth of the witnesses’ descriptions. The court also found that defendant failed to establish ineffective assistance based on alleged lack of preparation because, even assuming deficiency, “there is no indication of a reasonable probability that the alleged errors affected the outcome,” given the “most damaging evidence” was the driver’s eyewitness account that he saw defendant with a gun immediately after the shots, corroborated by phone-location evidence. Affirmed.