Other acts evidence; Sexual assault; MCL 768.27b; People v Cameron; Hearsay; Medical treatment statements; MRE 803(4); People v Mahone; Sentencing; Proportionality; People v Posey; Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE)

The court held that the trial court did not reversibly err in its evidentiary rulings, did not deny defendant a fair trial by refusing videoconference testimony from a defense witness, and did not impose a disproportionate sentence. The case arose from a 2012 sexual assault in which JP, then 17, testified that defendant forced vaginal penetration after she repeatedly said no, and afterward followed her outside while masturbating as she fled. A SANE exam documented genital abrasions and bruising, and DNA testing later identified defendant as a possible contributor to the cervical-swab evidence. The jury convicted defendant of CSC I. On appeal, the court held that evidence involving JP, JN, and EH was admissible under MCL 768.27b because the statute permits relevant other acts of sexual assault “for any purpose,” subject to MRE 403, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding the evidence was highly probative and not unfairly prejudicial. The court next held that other-acts evidence involving HC, CM, and RL was properly admitted under MRE 404(b) because it showed a distinctive pattern of sexually predatory conduct, including following women and masturbating in front of them, which bolstered JP’s credibility about defendant’s conduct immediately after the charged assault. The court also held that the SANE’s testimony recounting JP’s statements was admissible under MRE 803(4) because JP sought treatment two days after the assault and the history was necessary to diagnosis and care. It further held that defendant was not entitled to relief based on expert testimony or testimony about fear of reprisal. Finally, the court held that the trial court acted within its discretion by refusing to allow a defense witness to testify by videoconference and that defendant failed to rebut the presumption that his within-guidelines sentence was proportionate. Affirmed.