Careers

Experiences

Industries

Offices

Our Firm

Pages

Our People

Updates

Practices

Home - Warner Norcross + Judd LLP

It is well established that an attorney who employs a legitimate trial strategy as a result of reasonable professional judgement is not ineffective.  Now, the Michigan Supreme Court has clarified that where testimony at trial establishes that defendant was the initial aggressor, it is a legitimate trial strategy to decide that self-defense is not a viable defense theory and therefore not request the self-defense jury instruction.  In <em><a href="http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/SCT/PUBLIC/ORDERS/153315_42_01.pdf">People v. Kusk</a></em>, No. 153315, trial counsel instead opted to argue that the defendant was innocent of the charges of felonious assault and felony-firearm. This strategy proved at least partially successful as the defendant was acquitted of felonious assault and felony firearm, and instead was only convicted of misdemeanor of domestic assault.  The Court of Appeals opinion was reversed and the case was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. <br />

core/freeform

Partner

Madelaine C. Lane

Labor and Employment

Trial counsel is not ineffective for failing to request self-defense jury instruction when defense is not viable

The Warner Norcross + Judd LLP lawyer responsible for the contents of our advertising and this website is managing partner <a href="/people/mark-j-wassink/" aria-label="Mark Wassink">Mark Wassink</a> who can be reached at <a href="mailto:mwassink@wnj.com" aria-label="email Mark Wassink">mwassink@wnj.com</a> or 616.752.2189. Please read our full <a href="/privacy-policy/" aria-label="see privacy policy">privacy policy</a> available on our website.

Trial counsel is not ineffective for failing to request self-defense jury instruction when defense is not viable

professionals