Background
Cyrus Naaseh Abadi was charged with first- and third-degree criminal sexual conduct based on allegations that he sexually assaulted a former girlfriend. The complainant also disclosed that she had consensual intercourse with another person 72 hours before one of the alleged incidents.
At the preliminary examination, the prosecution argued that Michigan’s rape-shield statute, MCL 750.520j, required Abadi to file a written motion and offer of proof before presenting evidence of the complainant’s past sexual conduct. The district court agreed and ordered that such evidence could not be elicited until the court reviewed the proposed evidence. The circuit court denied Abadi leave to pursue an interlocutory appeal, but the Court of Appeals granted leave.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals held that the procedural requirements of MCL 750.520j do not apply during a preliminary examination. The statute requires a defendant to file a motion and offer of proof within 10 days after arraignment on the information, which occurs only after the defendant has been bound over to circuit court following a preliminary examination or waiver of that examination. The district court therefore erred by imposing those post-arraignment requirements at the preliminary-examination stage.
The court emphasized that MRE 404(a)(2)(C), which contains parallel restrictions concerning evidence of an alleged victim’s past sexual conduct, does apply at preliminary examinations because those proceedings are governed by the Michigan Rules of Evidence. The court did not decide whether Abadi’s proposed evidence was admissible under that rule. It also rejected the prosecution’s harmless-error argument because this interlocutory appeal occurred before any judgment or verdict and sought resolution of the legal issue before the preliminary examination continued. The court reversed the district court’s order.
Key Takeaways
- MCL 750.520j’s written-motion and offer-of-proof requirements arise after arraignment on the information and do not govern preliminary examinations.
- MRE 404(a)(2)(C) governs the admissibility of an alleged victim’s past sexual conduct at a preliminary examination.
- The court resolved only which legal authority applies; it did not determine whether the evidence Abadi sought to offer was admissible.
Why It Matters
The decision clarifies that Michigan courts may not import the rape-shield statute’s post-arraignment filing procedure into preliminary examinations. Defense counsel seeking to introduce covered evidence at that stage must instead address admissibility under the Michigan Rules of Evidence.
The ruling preserves evidentiary protections for complainants while distinguishing those protections from statutory procedures that, by their text, take effect later in a felony prosecution.