Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Motion For Relief From Judgment

    Uploaded by

    Clickon Detroit
    12K views8 pages
    Motion for Relief From Judgment

    Original Title

    Motion for Relief From Judgment

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Motion for Relief From Judgment

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    12K views8 pages

    Motion For Relief From Judgment

    Uploaded by

    Clickon Detroit
    Motion for Relief From Judgment

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 8
    STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF WAYNE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff Hon. Vonda R. Evans No, 01-3829-FC MUBAREZ SALEH AHMED, Defendant igan Innocence Clinie University of Michigan Law School David A. Moran (P45353) Ian J. Syed (P75415) Rebecca L. Hahn (P80555) Carolina Velarde (Student Attomey) Sara Stapper (Student Attomey) ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT 701 S. State St. ‘Ann Atbor, M1 48108 (734) 763.9383, INTRODUCTION Defendant Mubarez Ahmed, by hs atforeys and student attorneys ofthe Michigan Innocence Clinic atthe University of Michigan Law School, asks that this Court set aside his conviction and order ‘new tral, pursuant to MCR 6.500 et seg, and states the following: Mr, Almmed has spent 15 years in prison fora second-degree murder conviction for the February 9, 2001 shooting deaths of Lavelle Griffin and LaTenya White ‘Afiera jury trial inthe Wayne County Circuit Cour, presided over by the Hon. Vonda R. Evans, No, 01-3529-FC, Mr. Alimed was convicted on March 5, 2002 of two counts of second-degree ‘murder and two counts of felony firearms. (On March 25, 2002, this Court sentenced Mr. Ahmed to 44-60 years imprisonment, He is serving. that sentence atthe Ionia Corretionel Facility in lonia, Michigan, He will rst be eligible for parole on February 13, 2045, ‘Mr. Ahmed appealed by right, and the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed his convietion on October 14, 2003. People v Ahmed, (No. 242183) (Mich App Oct 14, 2003). The Michigan ‘Supreme Court denied his application for leave to appeal on June 10, 2004. People v Aimed, 470 ‘Mich 873; 687 NW2d 292 (2004), ‘Mr. Ahmed filed one pro se motion for reli fom judgment on May 23, 2005. He amended that ‘motion on August 8, 2005. This Court denied that motion on September 1, 2005. Me. Ahmed filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus inthe Eastem District of Michigan, which ‘was denied in 2008. Aimed v Wolfenbarger, No 2:06-14106 (ED Mich Dee 9, 2008). Me, Ahmed was represented during preliminary matters and at tril by Mare Hart, and was represented on direct appeal by Linda Ashford. Joan Ellerbusch Morgan represented Mr. Ahmed forhis federal habeas petition 10. All ofthe issues in Mr. Ahmed!'s Motion for Relief from Judgment are being presented for the first time today. These claims could have not been raised previously because they are based on new evidence that was not yet discovered when Mr. Ahmed filed his prior motion in 2005, ‘Therefore, this Court may consider these claims. MCR 6.502(G)(2). FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE Inthe arty afternoon on February 9, 2001, Lavelle Griffin and LaTanya White were shot and ill i ther ear a the intersection of Kirkwood and Lumley Streets in Detroit. Based on an anonymous tip that identified the shooter by a nickname, the Detoit Police focused {heir investigation entirely on Mr. Ahmed, Police didnot investigate eltemate suspects named by frends and family members ofthe vietims during police interviews, suchas Roderick Tolbert, (also known a5 “Lite Jay"). One witness who knew Mr. Griffin, Shemeka Bryant, tol police immediately afer the shooting that she strongly suspected Lite Jay commited the king Sergeant Emest Wilson, an officer inthe homicide division of the Detroit Police Department and the officer in charge of the investigation, showed Izora Clark,' an eyewitness to the shooting, a photo of Mr. Ahmed and told er thet Me. Ahmed was ikely the shooter. Ms. Clark subsequently identified Mr. Ahmed in a police lineup after Mr. Ahmed had been areste. Before tril, Mr. Ahmed moved to suppress this identification onthe ground that he hed been arrested without probable cause and thatthe identification was fut ofthe illegal ares. Sergeant Wilson testified during an evidentiary hearing on Mr. Ahmed's motion to suppres, held before is Court on January 3, 2002, He testified about Ms. Clark's description ofthe shooter, the anonymous tip, and that Mr, Ahmed’s alleged girlfriend, Julie Wheeler, drove a car that matched the description of the car used by the shooter. Wilson also testified that this red ear " AC the time ofthe shooting, Izora Clark was known as lzora Woods, ‘had been brought into the police station for “investigation.” 14. In denying his motion to suppress, this Court explicitly relied on the information that Mr. Ahmed's purported girlfriend drove a car of the same color as the one used in the shooting. 15, Atrial, Ms, Clark's identification was the only evidence against Mr, Ahmed. However, there was no mention of Julie Wheeler or her red car. 16. In its investigation of this ease, the Michigan Innocence Clinic retained private investi Lewis. Mr. Lewis located Julie Wheeler, Mr. Ahmed’s alleged girlfriend who had supposedly brought her red Ford to the homicide department for investigation and testing. Ms. Wheeler signed an affidavit (Appendix F to accompanying Memorandum in Support revealing thst she hhad never heard of Mr. Ahmed before Mr. Lewis contacted her. She has also never spoken with the police regarding this case. 17. The defense was unaware ofthe police's fabrication of Wheeler’s connection to Mr. Abumed. In his affidavit, which is attached to the accompanying Memorandum in Support (Appendix G), trial counsel Mare Hart states that, had he been aware that Ms, Wheeler's involvement was fabricated he would have informed the Court that it relied on false information to find probable ‘cause to arrest Mr. Alnmed and to deny his motion to suppress. If there had still been atrial after the probable cause hearing, Mr. Hart would have used this information to impeach the credibility of Sergeant Wilkon and to undermine the reliability ofthe entire murder investigation, 18, In July 2016, lzora Clark recanted her trial testimony and identification of Mr. Ahmed (Appendix A to accompanying Memorandum in Support. In her affidavit, Ms, Clark confirms that she never saw Mr. Ahmed on the day ofthe murder. Rather, she was shown a photograph of Ms. Ahmed shartl before the police lineup and was told thatthe police had reason to believe that Mr. Aled was the shooter. Ms. Clark felt pressured by the police to identify Mr. Akmed, 19. In April 2017, Larry Evans, who knew both victims personaly, signed an affidavit (Appendix to the accompanying Memorandum in Suppor) revealing that he had witnessed the shooting, and that a man known as “Lit le Jay” (real name Roderick Tolbert) had boasted to him six ‘months later about committing these murders. Tolbert also offered to sell Evans the gun that was used to commit the erime, 20, Mr. Evans first came forward with this information in 2008, when he gave his account tothe Detroit Police (Evans 2008 Police Statement, Appendix D to accompanying Memorandum). 21. The Detroit Police ignored this new information from Mr. Evans and did not tum it over to Mr. ‘Ahmed, Mr. Ahmed discovered this information when the Michigan Innocence Clinic received Evans’ 2008 police statement in a 2015 FOIA request. 22. In 2003, Little Jay (Roderick Tolbert) bragged to Sobhi Neme about murdering two people from the neighborhood in 2001. In his 2016 affidavit (Appendix E tothe accompanying Memorandum), Mr. Neme states that he called the Detroit Potice and spoke to Officer Gilbert, who made it clear that the police already had « conviction for that shooting, In 2005, Mr. Neme again called the police department with this information. He was told that the case was closed. GROUNDS FOR RELIEF 1 Mr. Ahmed Is Entitled To A New Trial On The Basis Of Newly Discovered Evidence Under The Cress Standard: The Recantation of Izora Clark And The ‘Account Of Larry Evans Warrant Relief From Judgment, Especially When Considered In Context With The Other Evidence In This Case. 23, Newly discovered evidence warrants a new trial where: I) the evidence itself, not merely its materiality, is newly discovered; (2 the evidence is not cumulative; (3) the party could not, using reasonable diligence, have discovered and produced ita trial and (4) in light ofthe new evidence, a different result would be reasonably likely on retrial. People v Cress, 468 Mich 678, 1692; 664 NW2d 174 (2003); People v Grissom, 492 Mich 296, 311-21; 821 NW2d $0 (2012), 24, lzora Clark's 2017 swom recantation, Larry Evans’ 2017 affidavit and Fis statement given to the police in 2008, individually and collstively, satisfy al four of the Cress requirements. As

    You might also like