PEOPLE OF MI V JOHN JAMES POKORNY
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
February 6, 2007
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 264649
St. Joseph Circuit Court
LC No. 03-011592-FC
JOHN JAMES POKORNY,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Borrello, P.J., and Jansen and Cooper, JJ.
COOPER, J. (concurring)
I agree with the result reached by the majority in this matter, and write separately only to
address the analysis of the admission of evidence of defendant’s methamphetamine use.
The majority found that this evidence was admitted for a proper purpose, and found that
although the probative value was low and the risk of prejudice high, because it presented a close
evidentiary question, the trial court did not abuse its discretion.
The majority admits that “[t]here was also a danger that the jurors in the present case
would be less likely to view defendant as a loving father and victim of a bitter custody dispute
after they learned that he had a record and spent thousands on methamphetamine.” But the
majority concludes that this potential danger was effectively resolved by the trial court’s
instruction to the jury that it could not consider this as evidence that defendant was a bad man or
more likely to have committed a crime.
I am not convinced the jury might so easily block out the logical inference that
defendant’s methamphetamine use and expenditures to support the habit do indeed make him if
not a bad person, at least a bad father.
Given the weak purpose relied upon as proper here, and the correspondingly negligible
probative value, I would find that the prejudicial effect of this evidence outweighed its probative
value, and that it was therefore improperly admitted.
-1-
Like the majority, I must conclude that this error was harmless, although I would do so as
a consequence of the weight of the other evidence offered against defendant.
/s/ Jessica R. Cooper
-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.