PEOPLE OF MI V EDWARD STUDSTILL
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
December 17, 2002
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 236336
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 01-000312
EDWARD STUDSTILL,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Owens, P.J., and Murphy and Cavanagh, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct,
MCL 750.520b(1)(b)(ii), for which he was sentenced to serve a prison term of three to fifteen
years. He appeals as of right, and we affirm.
On appeal, defendant argues that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to adequately
impeach complainant regarding the inconsistencies between her police statement and testimony,
failing to object to the introduction of similar acts evidence, and failing to properly object to the
introduction of defendant’s own police statements. To establish a claim of ineffective assistance
of counsel, a defendant must demonstrate that counsel’s performance was deficient and that,
under an objective standard of reasonableness, the error was so serious that counsel was not
functioning as an attorney as guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. People v Pickens,
446 Mich 298, 302-303; 521 NW2d 797 (1994). Because defendant failed to raise or preserve
this issue at the trial court level, our review is limited to the record itself. People v Nantelle, 215
Mich App 77, 87; 544 NW2d 667 (1996).
Here, in light of defendant’s inculpatory oral and written statements to police, as well as
his own testimony at trial in which he admitted penetrating complainant’s vagina with his penis,
trial counsel’s choice of trial strategy was severely limited. Even had counsel chosen to more
vigorously impeach complainant or object to the admission of similar acts evidence, the outcome
of this proceeding would not have been different. Defendant established his guilt by his own
statements. We further note that because this was a bench trial, the lack of prejudice to
defendant by counsel’s representation is even clearer. See People v Jones, 168 Mich App 191,
194; 423 NW2d 614 (1988).
-1-
Finally, although defendant asserts that counsel should have moved to suppress his
inculpatory statements, he asserts no factual or legal basis for such a motion, and we find no such
basis to exist in the record. Thus, counsel’s performance was not deficient.
Affirmed.
/s/ Donald S. Owens
/s/ William B. Murphy
/s/ Mark J. Cavanagh
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
