Appeal DENIED
Find a Conversation
| Mon, 03-01-2004 - 7:11pm |
People of the State of Michigan(plaintiff-Appellee) V Dennis M***** S******(Defendant)
Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of first degree premeditated murder, and was sentenced to a mandatory term of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. Defendant appeals as of right. We affirm.
This case involves the murder of defendant's estranged wife, an East Lansing resident whose partally clad body was discovered in a landfill near the campus of Bowling Green State University in Ohio. Defendant contends that the prosecutor failed to present sufficient evidence to prove that the murder occured in Ingham County.
Venue, although not an element of a crime, is nonetheless a part of every criminal case, and must be proved by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt.(*case sited..I am skipping the cases that they site in here)Due process requires thta a criminal prosecution take place before a trier of fact of the city or county where the offense occurred, except as otherwise provided by Legislature. *
This court reviews de novo whether the trial court had proper venue in a criminal case de novo. * Venue is a factual isssue and the trier of fact was permitted to make rationa inferences and consider circumstatial evidence in finding that the crime was perpetrated inIngham County. *
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational fact finder could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim was killed in Ingham County. Thomas Huff testified that he met defendant while in jail in Ohio in February 2001. Defendant told Huff he was in jail for murdering his boyfriend, and eventually told Huff that he had murdered his wife in Lansing because she found out that he had an affair with a man and was going to "tell everybody about it." Additionally, the testimony established that the victim feared defendant, had the locks on her apartment changed, and was in the process of seeking a personal protection order against him. The victim was last seen at her apartment in East Lansing at 6:00 a.m. on June 30, 2000, after finishing a newspaper delivery route. The victim was scheduled to begin her internship work at Community Mental Health at 9:00 a.m. on June 30, but did not show up for work, did not call in to report that she would be absent, and was not seen alive by anyone after 6:00a.m. on June 30, 2000. The following morning, the victims Plymouth Reliant was seen parked in a Toledo, Ohio, parking lot at 7:30a.m. Defendant's fingerprintswas found on the inside of the drivers door window. The timing of the victims disappearance, as well as evidence that the victim was minimally clothed when her body was discovered and that she would not have voluntarily left her apartment with defendant, provides sufficient circumstantial evidenct that the victim was killed inside her apartment on June 30. *
Defendant also argues that the trial court erred by denying defendant's motion to suppress a letter written by the victim that was siezed by police officers during a lawful serch of a box found in a sotrage unit because the letter did not constitute evidence or contraband. The trial court found that the letter fell under the plain-view exception to the warrant requirement:
It has been stipulated that the officers wree lawfully in the storage - that the officers were lawfully present, pursuant to a warrant, in the storage locker. They were authorized pursuant to that warrant to search for papers and writings of the defendant. In so doing, they uncovered what has been marked as Exhibit 1 to the prosecutors brief.
It is a one-paged typed written statement. It is dated the day before the victim of this crime disappeared. It is a request for a personal protection order. It is signed by the victim. The first line of that statement states that the victim seeks protection from the defendant.
Whether on views the investigation at that time as a missing person's investigation or a murder investigation, it is and would be, to any reasonable investigator, immediately apparent that such a document would have relevancy to the investigation. This is not a case where the police have further invaded the privacy of the defendant. They did not go into an area not authorized. They did not inspect types of documents that were not authorized.
Their conduct, under the totality of the circumstances, was reasonable, and the statement was lawfully seized under the plain view doctrine. Motion is denied.
And more legal talk but my fingers are getting tired. Basically he wanted a retrial because he thought that they hadnt proved venue and had used this evidence that shouldnt have been used in his opinion.
A small victory for us. He will never be back out in society but I still miss my sister terribly. Please everyone read this and know that it could be YOUR family that is getting this paper. If it could happen to my sister it could happen to anyone. Please leave your abusive partner as soon as you are able. Make a safety plan and let people know what is going on....People that you can trust.
My sister is now memorialized in the Transformation Project/ Silent Witness Project on the Bowling Green Campus with too many other women that are fatal victims of domestic abuse. Please dont let your name be added to that list/statistic.
Hugs to you all. May God protect you all and give you the strength to do what you know is right in your heart.
Love,
Reemeow

Pages
Don't worry he will never be released...he murdered my sister and another man also a few days after my sister disappeared. The prosecutor in MI told us that he will never be released. In MI he has a life sentence without the possibility of parole and in Ohio..where he murdered his friend/boyfriend he has 30 years...so once Ohio is done with him he will be taken to Michigan to serve for the rest of his life.
Thank you so much for the wonderful image of my sister beside me every day. I would truly be blessed if she were my guardian angel.
God Bless You.
Love and Hugs,
Ree
Your not rambling, everything that is typed/written is helping, not only you but others as well. I have been strugglin (ask anyone here on the board!) for a LONG time about the way my dh is and if it is really abuse. Only since reading "stalking the soul" have I really admitted that it is. Yes, I wanted to stick my head back in the sand and not see it. I wanted to deny it. But I was getting so depressed and couldn't figure out why. I wonder, like you, have I done enough to save us? And I have to answer that yes I did. For 23 years I have catered to his every whim. I have been at his disposal. I'm no more comfortable going to counseling than he would be. I know he wouldn't go, and I know he won't understand. But I had to get to that point in my own time in my own way. And I believe that I have.
Hugs to you, both you and your sister are in my prayers and thoughts.
Pam
Pages