Ineffective assistance of counsel; Strickland v Washington; Failure to investigate & call witnesses; People v Trakhtenberg; Ginther hearing; People v Ginther; Self-defense; MCL 780.972(1)(a); Concession of guilt; Closing argument; Alternative defense theories; Expert testimony; Forensic pathologist; People v Unger

The court held that defendant failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel based on counsel’s failure to investigate or call proposed witnesses, alleged concession of guilt, or failure to object to expert testimony. Defendant was convicted of first-degree murder and firearm offenses after a fatal shooting at a neighborhood block party. The court remanded for a Ginther hearing on whether counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate or call two proposed defense witnesses, and the trial court denied a new trial. On appeal, the court held that the proposed testimony would not have changed the verdict because much of it was cumulative to trial evidence that the victim was intoxicated, had argued with others, had threatened someone, and may have had a gun. The court also agreed the proposed witnesses were “not credible,” noting inconsistencies, jail communications with defendant, possible collusion, and one witness’s motive after pleading no contest to accessory after the fact. Although the witnesses would have testified the victim fired first, the court held the trial court did not clearly err in finding their testimony unlikely to affect the outcome. The court next rejected defendant’s claim that counsel conceded guilt in closing. Viewed in context, counsel did not abandon self-defense and reasonably pursued alternative theories of insufficient evidence and self-defense without admitting defendant shot the victim. Finally, counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the forensic pathologist’s opinion that the manner of death was homicide because a forensic pathologist is qualified to opine on manner of death, and any objection would have been futile. Affirmed.