PEOPLE OF MI V MICHAEL C JORDAN

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, UNPUBLISHED September 8, 1998 Plaintiff-Appellee, v No. 203320 Recorder’s Court LC No. 96-002742 MICHAEL C. JORDAN, Defendant-Appellant. Before: Holbrook, Jr., P.J., and Wahls and Cavanagh, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Defendant appeals by right his convictions for assault with intent to commit great bodily harm less than murder, MCL 750.84; MSA 28.279, and felony-firearm, MCL 750.227b; MSA 28.424(2), entered after a bench trial. We affirm. Defendant’s convictions arose out of a gang-related shooting incident which took place on March 13, 1996. The trial court found that defendant shot at a passing truck several times, resulting in a bullet wound to one of the occupants. The court rejected defendant’s claim of self-defense, where there was no evidence that the truck’s occupants were armed or fired at defendant. On appeal defendant argues that his convictions were not supported by sufficient evidence. In determining whether the prosecution has presented sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction, an appellate court is required to view the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and determine whether any rational trier 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 (1992). Where defendant fired several shots at a passing truck, there was sufficient evidence to support his conviction for assault with intent to commit great bodily harm. People v Lugo, 214 Mich App 699, 710; 542 NW2d 921 (1995). Defendant acknowledged possessing and firing a pistol, providing sufficient evidence to support his felony-firearm conviction. -1­ While defendant argues that he acted in self-defense, the trial court found that there was no evidence that the occupants of the truck were armed or fired at defendant. There is no showing that the court erred in making this finding of fact. People v Shields, 200 Mich App 554, 558; 504 NW2d 711 (1993). Viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that defendant did not have an honest and reasonable belief that he was in danger of being killed or seriously injured. People v Heflin, 434 Mich 482, 502; 456 NW2d 10 (1990); People v Truoug (After Remand), 218 Mich App 325, 337; 553 NW2d 692 (1996). Affirmed. /s/ Donald E. Holbrook, Jr. /s/ Myron H. Wahls /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.