PEOPLE OF MI V JAMES WILLIAM AUSSICKER
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
June 29, 2004
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 245058
Macomb Circuit Court
LC No. 02-000282-FH
JAMES WILLIAM AUSSICKER,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Owens, P.J., and Kelly and Gribbs,*
MEMORANDUM.
Defendant appeals as of right from his conviction of felony murder, MCL 750.316(1)(b),
following a jury trial. We affirm.
On appeal, defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. In determining whether
sufficient evidence has been presented to sustain a conviction, a reviewing court “must view the
evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and determine whether any national finder
of fact could have found that the essential elements of the crime were proven beyond a
reasonable doubt.” People v Wolfe, 440 Mich 508, 515; 489 NW2d 748, amended 441 Mich
1201 (1992). “The standard of review is deferential: a reviewing court is required to draw all
reasonable inferences and make credibility choices in support of the jury verdict.” People v
Nowack, 462 Mich 392, 400; 614 NW2d 78 (2000).
The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. Viewed in a light most favorable
to the prosecution, the evidence established that defendant was the last person to be seen with the
decedent. A reasonable juror could conclude that the attack took place between the short time
that defendant was left alone with the decedent, and the time the decedent failed to answer his
wife’s phone call. A wrench found in defendant’s truck was identified as consistent with the tool
used to break into the decedent’s strong box, and defendant was seen shortly after the attack with
a large number of quarters, coinciding with the quarters missing from the decedent’s house.
Finally, defendant gave inconsistent statements to the police, first denying any knowledge of or
contact with the decedent, then gradually admitting that he new the decedent, that he was at the
decedent’s house, and that he touched the strongbox while in the house. A rational finder of fact
* Former Court of Appeals judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1-
could conclude that the elements of felony murder were proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Wolfe, supra.
Affirmed.
/s/ Donald S. Owens
/s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly
/s/ Roman S. Gribbs
-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.
