Ineffective assistance of counsel; People v. Gioglio (On Remand); Failure to make a futile motion; People v. Riley; Prejudice; Kimmelman v. Morrison; Probable cause; People v. Martin; People v. Hellstrom; Motion to suppress; People v. Daoud; Voluntariness; People v. Elliason; People v. Wells; People v. Etheridge; People v. Cipriano; People v. Shipley; Right to remain silent; Miranda v. Arizona; Anderson v. Charles; People v. Cole; People v. Anderson; People v. Davis; Abibi witness; People v. Gray; United States v. Aguwa (6th Cir.); People v. Diaz; Sentencing; Cruel & unusual punishment; U.S. Const. amend. VIII; Const. 1963, art. 1, § 16; People v. Benton; Mandatory life sentencing for juvenile offenders; Graham v. Florida; Miller v. Alabama; People v. Hall

Holding that there were no errors requiring reversal, the court affirmed defendant’s convictions and sentences. He was convicted of CCW, felony-firearm, first-degree felony murder, armed robbery, and conspiracy to commit armed robbery, arising from the shooting death of the victim. The trial court sentenced him to 38 months to 60 months for CCW, 2 years for felony-firearm, life without the possibility of parole for murder, and 20 to 40 years each for his armed-robbery and conspiracy convictions. On appeal, the court rejected his arguments that his trial was unfair and that his sentence was unconstitutional. First, it found he was not denied the effective assistance of counsel. It next held that the trial court did not err when it determined that, “under the totality of the circumstances, [his] statements [to police] were the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice by its maker.” It further found that the trial court “did not err when it allowed the prosecutor to question [defendant] about inconsistencies between his trial testimony and his earlier statement to police officers. The prosecutor also did not commit misconduct by arguing that the best explanation for the inconsistencies was that” defendant made up the version that he gave at trial. Finally, the court held that, “[g]iven the weight of authority declining to extend the reasoning of Graham and Miller to young adult offenders, the trial court did not” err by sentencing him to life without the possibility of parole.