Did the State Ambush the Defense? | Judge Elmore’s Ruling

追加: 2026-05-18

[00:00:00]days for speedy trial. It it feels like a backdoor attempt to try to strong-arm my client into an adjournment because the people are not prepared for trial.

[00:00:13]This is a pre-trial hearing where the timing becomes the real issue. The case is getting close to trial, but the prosecution wants to add something new, and the defense pushes back hard. Watch how the judge works through the legal consequences before making the call. My name is Dan. This is The Courtroom Files.

[00:00:30]Uh good morning and welcome to the 28th Circuit Court here in Wexford County, and we begin today's doctor call by taking up the case of People of the State of Michigan versus Michael Joseph Calloway. Uh this is file number 26-14185-FC.

[00:00:48]Appearances from counsel, please. Good morning, Your Honor. Aaron Houser on behalf of the people.

[00:00:52]Thank you, Your [snorts] Honor.

[00:00:54]>> [clears throat] >> Thank you, Your Honor. Taylor and Anna Fioritto on behalf of the defendant who is making his way >> [cough and clears throat] >> out of the courtroom now now from the jail area. All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Calloway is now being escorted here in the courtroom, and he is uh now seated at the defense table. We are here today uh for two issues, at least initially. Uh the first one is a a final pre-trial conference. This case is uh currently set for trial on May 26th, if the file recall, or at least to begin on that day.

[00:01:34]And we also have a bond motion uh by the defense. Oh, wait. Hold on.

[00:01:40]No. Actually, I know we >> like to motion on the record today, Your Honor. I was reading the other line above it, but I know we've got a motion for that today as well. So, let's first cover the final pre-trial conference portion.

[00:01:53]Uh I met briefly with uh counsel in chambers. I know there was some other talk going on.

[00:02:01]Uh Miss Yerbento, do we have any resolution to enter in the record today?

[00:02:05]No, your honor.

[00:02:06]Uh there was a offer that wasn't over. I reviewed it with my client. My client is rejecting it. Uh that offer would be to potentially plead guilty to two counts of CSC first, two counts of CSC second.

[00:02:17]There were some other uh considerations there for sentencing and things. My client is a hard no on that.

[00:02:24]Uh we would like to proceed to trial on the 26th, and I know we have to address the issue of prosecutor's motion that was filed that was on Tuesday. All right. Well, let's take a look at it.

[00:02:32]Now, I don't think the people filed a motion.

[00:02:34]>> I'm sorry. Notice. I got it.

[00:02:37]But, they did file a notice of intent to uh present evidence at the trial pursuant to MCL 768.27b.

[00:02:47]Uh when we were last on the record, >> [snorts] >> um I think we were Yeah, we were here when we were here for the motion on the expert witnesses, if I recall.

[00:03:01]And we talked about uh government let us know that there might be some reason to extend it out as they were continuing to conduct investigation, or at least when law enforcement officers were. I said, "Well, we're not going to adjust any dates now cuz I wanted to keep the pressure on law enforcement to uh complete their investigation." Uh this uh motion, not motion, but information that was filed on May 6th, uh as far as I know, is a culmination of that investigation, placing the people uh placing the defendant [snorts] and defense counsel on notice of details.

[00:03:38]So, uh next question becomes uh what do we do? Do we Is there going to be a motion in limine filed by the defense?

[00:03:50]>> Too late.

[00:03:59]Sorry, did I just let an airplane go by?

[00:04:01]Um Um which really would be a motion to eliminate eliminate by the defense. So, we call it a response, but really it's a motion to be filed by the defense. So, does the defense elect to file and have a hearing on the admissibility of that evidence?

[00:04:18]Uh yes, Your Honor. And I could get that in I believe by Tuesday of next week. Uh there is some stuff in there that's new, but a lot of it is things that we expected already and it's similar to what was back at the preliminary exam.

[00:04:30]Okay. Thank you. All right. Well, I know next week I am in Lansing on Thursday and I am uh on a semi-vacation on Friday and uh following Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday.

[00:04:51]So, I know we're going to have some limited time as a hearing and that's going to take Next Friday would be the 15th, so we know we're uh pushing into uh toward the end of May. One moment.

[00:05:08]Yeah.

[00:05:12]So, unless we have a hearing on Wednesday the 13th next week, which I believe I have quite a bit of availability.

[00:05:22]Uh the other is is now we're pushing a hearing into the uh last week of May, which is when the trial is currently scheduled.

[00:05:31]All right. So, I'm going to turn it over to Ms. House. Ms. House, you do You and I Sorry, we all spoke in chambers about some availability of witnesses and potentially a request to adjourn uh by the defense. Adjourn the trial, I mean.

[00:05:47]Not by the defense, by the people.

[00:05:48]>> I'm sorry, by the people. Thank you. I apologize. Go ahead, Miss uh Your Honor, >> [clears throat] >> the notice that I filed is uh lengthy.

[00:05:55]It's 34 pages long. It goes into very specific detail about prior acts of domestic violence that the people intend to present evidence of that the defendant started committing, excuse [clears throat] me, in 2003 uh to 2008 with the mother of three of his children, and then between 2010 and 2019 with the mother of the victim in this case. So, uh 768.27b allows for admission of domestic violence evidence in sexual assault trials and sexual assault evidence in domestic violence trials. Um but that is a little more unusual than sometimes when we admit domestic violence evidence in a domestic violence trial. Mhm. And such as that. So, I certainly want to make sure that we're protecting all of the defendant's rights in this situation. So, um And while it's not automatic admissibility, the court is still required under 768 to do a 403 analysis. So, therefore, it almost requires or demands the court to review the All right. Yes. So, there are that those issues, and then obviously, whatever the result is of the court's decision in terms of whether all of this evidence, some of this evidence, none of this evidence will be admissible trial is also going to probably impact both the defendant's decisions about whether he wants to accept the offer or go to trial, as well as it could affect whether the people want to make a different offer at that point. So, my concern about pushing this so close to the trial is that I don't know that it leaves enough time for all of that to occur. I also am not sure whether this court is going to want all of our other acts witnesses to appear and testify. Is that an evidentiary hearing, or is it simply um a hearing where I as an officer of the court make an offer of proof about what I believe that these people are going to testify to? That may impact how much time we need to be able to conduct that. So, I just have a concern that to thoroughly address this to make sure that we are, you know, not proceeding to trial on anything that we shouldn't, that we protect the defendant's rights. It just doesn't seem to make sense to me that we're going to be able to get all that done in a meaningful way and then afterwards negotiate before a trial that starts on the 26th. All right.

[00:08:01]Um as far as the evidentiary hearing, it's up to the people as to how they present that evidence. It could be uh by an officer of the court. However, I would say it would should be something more than that cuz I think I need to have some evidence to be able to consider it.

[00:08:20]That could then come either through a live witness testimony or other things uh such as uh police reports, uh recordings of interviews, things like that. Uh whatever the But that's all up to the people. I'm not going to tell them how uh to present it. Uh but And then if the defense wishes to have other witnesses here, uh that could be something you all take care of.

[00:08:49]All right. So, we I'll also note that this added Uh we're sorry. Were these witnesses added to the witness list?

[00:08:57]Yes, they have been, Your Honor.

[00:08:58]>> All right.

[00:08:59]Uh were they added within 28 days of the trial date or were they added when you submitted the notice? Um they were actually I filed the new witness list this morning.

[00:09:08]>> Okay. Um and it does include these new witnesses.

[00:09:12]Some of them were on a witness list that we had before. I think it's just um the new witness uh CVS Okay. who we didn't know about before. All right.

[00:09:24]So, uh that means we are within the six the 28 days of trial. So, I assume therefore the people are requesting or motioning the court to permit the additional witnesses outside that 28 days. Yes, your honor. All right, thank you. Yes, ma'am. I was going to say we are not within the rule for the 28 days and we would have asked for CVS. As for Ms. Barkley, again, she testified she Her testimony was at the preliminary exam.

[00:09:52]I wouldn't say that this is necessarily a surprise that this is being filed.

[00:09:57]That said, I would emphasize the fact that there have been prior requests by the people to adjourn that May trial date and my client has refused. My client wants his day in court. He's demanded his right to jury trial.

[00:10:11]Uh the fact that this is being filed while it's within the 15 days, it feels with this additional evidence from CVS, which again, could have been obtained at any other point. We're almost at 180 days for speedy trial. It It feels like a backdoor attempt to try to strong-arm my client into an adjournment because the people are not prepared for trial instead of being an actual legitimate attempt to bring in 2017.

[00:10:38]Thank you.

[00:10:39]Well, And just to be clear, this new witness was interviewed uh the week prior. I didn't receive the report until 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday night and then I completed drafting my motion and filed it I think 11:30 a.m. the next day. So, I did the best that I could on that, but I don't have control over when she got interviewed and there was a delay in getting the report to me. All right.

[00:11:04]Uh First [snorts] of all, um the uh the argument here against the modification of the witness list, which is really the question, is somewhat circular.

[00:11:20]It [clears throat] wasn't an unfair surprise, therefore there is no unfair prejudice and everybody knew about it, but they were just getting the statements. Now, the alternative could have been and maybe the defense would have liked it or probably not liked it, gone to trial without a statement.

[00:11:45]They don't have to go get police statements or interviews of a witness.

[00:11:49]They can just list witnesses and never have a report statement, which probably defense attorney wouldn't want. You'd probably want that statement. Right? To prepare to cross-examine a witness.

[00:12:07]Your Honor, I think there is some confusion. There were two witnesses listed in the notice. One is Ms. Barkley, who we have known about since prelim and who testified at prelim. We had statements from her at prelim. The other is CVS, who was newly disclosed.

[00:12:20]So, if the question is unfair surprise as to CVS, very likely that could be an argument, but again, we're in a catch 22 because there is no reason that people could not have interviewed CVS way before we were close to the 180-day mark. Why are we waiting I I I understand the situation. There's no reason this notice couldn't have been filed sooner. It's been the Okay, I'm sorry. Go ahead.

[00:12:42]>> Mhm.

[00:12:43]Defense is in a catch-22 because if we agree to the adjournment, my client is sitting here, his wife is due to give birth to their child any day and she's having medical complications. On the other hand, we don't go forward on the 26th. All right, sorry, we do go forward on the 26th and we're potentially at this disadvantage. I've talked to my client about the pros and cons. He wants to go forward on the 26th. He doesn't want this further delay. He claims his innocence and at the end of the day, the evidence is it's a pure he said, she said type of case. Okay.

[00:13:12]All right, so let's go back to it. The fact is is that am I correct? We We've all known about CVS for a while? Not CVS. We've known about Ms. Barkley, TV. We've known about TV. We've not known about CVS.

[00:13:25]>> So, how is there evidence to suggest that the prosecution was not exercising due diligence to get CBS if nobody knew about CBS until recently?

[00:13:37]The defense didn't know about CBS.

[00:13:40]>> I don't know when the prosecutor found out about CBS. Well, that's got to be the argument. The argument to say that you feel like this is a backdoor or some kind of tactical advantage or disadvantage. There's no evidence that it is an intentional or negligent delay in finding something out.

[00:13:58]Um so I don't understand what >> for Ms. House when she learned about CBS.

[00:14:05]Um but she just got the report. Now, keep in mind, the other point here is you could have just added the When time When did you add it to the witness list?

[00:14:19]Um Well, I I just added it today. I was waiting for the court to rule whether she could or couldn't testify, but then I thought I better just add her presumptively. Yeah.

[00:14:28]Well, this is one of those instances where if I say what I [clears throat] think, which I think I'm required to because I need to establish the reasoning of my ruling, somewhere down the road, somebody who is sitting at Sado is going to go, "Oh my gosh, in his ruling, he gave legal advice."

[00:14:53]Well, I'm not trying to give legal advice and I'm not trying to be injudicious.

[00:14:57]Let's think about this.

[00:14:59]Let's say I don't allow CBS. I highly suspect that Ms. Fioravante is going to cross-examine witnesses.

[00:15:10]Then does that become relevant Does CBS become relevant in rebuttal? I also don't know what witnesses the defense is going to present. Are they going to present any witness that might say that the defendant would never do this.

[00:15:24]If they did, it becomes rebuttal evidence. You open the door.

[00:15:30]Now, for you all to probably make an educated decision about what questions to ask and not ask, specifically on the defense, it seems like you would want to have the police report. So, they had to have time to gather the information to be able to get the police report.

[00:15:46]Now, Ms. House would have had the out would have had the choice a week or 2 weeks ago to just add the witness to the witness list and I would have approved it if it was within that outs, you know, within the 28-day rule.

[00:16:02]And she didn't have to go get it, but she went out and got the report, which helps the defense be prepared.

[00:16:08]Therefore, I find that there is no unfair practice or surprise. In fact, it's quite helpful to both sides in establishing their cases in chief, both the direct and the cross-examinations.

[00:16:25]Therefore, the court grants the oral motion to add amend the witness list outside the 28 days.

[00:16:36]Okay. Now, the next question is about adjourning the trial. I believe we talked about and that's to be and I don't remember if you've already raised that, Ms. House. You may raise it.

[00:16:47]Yes, Your Honor. So, I guess I didn't say the specific words, but due to the timing of this >> I couldn't remember if you did or not.

[00:16:52]>> Yeah, so due to the timing of this, I'm just saying that I'm concerned for protecting our appellate record that we not rush through something that could be This is very significant evidence. If this comes in at trial, this is going to be incredibly damning to the defendant.

[00:17:05]Um we want to make sure that we only let in what's appropriate, what the court deems to be appropriate. The court's going to need to make a ruling about whether evidence going as far back as 2003 can come in. Um if I need to have all these people testify, um I will need some time to find out when they're available and to do that. If the court instead wants to review recorded interviews, that we probably have That's all >> it's like 8 hours of recorded interviews. That's all up to you and how you all present it to me. Whether it's in an interview and let's say for example you were just to provide to the court a police report or even just the witness of the officer who investigated it.

[00:17:44]Um [snorts] I would expect the defense to maybe object. So it might be that I need to look at the actual interviews. That's all up to you all.

[00:17:53]I'm just sitting here waiting to call balls and strikes.

[00:17:56]Okay.

[00:17:58]Mr. Barriento, your response as to the request to adjourn the trial date. Thank you, Your Honor. We're going to object and before going on the record today, I did talk to my client about the pros and cons of objecting in light of this 27B.

[00:18:11]He's in a catch-22.

[00:18:13]And I mentioned this already. On the one hand, if he agrees to this adjournment, he continues to sit in jail. His wife is due to have a baby any day in a complicated pregnancy situation and he's here away from all of that and he's already close to his 180 days. On the other hand, He's at I understand the court's concerns. When does When does his 180 days run? I have him at 150 days from his bond date as of today, but I believe he was picked up and extradited before that if I may. What was the date that he got jailed again? He got jailed in November. 170 days today.

[00:18:46]He He says he was picked up on the 18th of November and I'll run a calculator on that. According to the 19th [snorts] of November, I'm sorry.

[00:18:54]Okay, hold on. 19th of November.

[00:18:56]According to the register of actions from the district court, he wasn't arrested until December 8th.

[00:19:10]Where was he between November 19th and December 8th? He had He was living out of state.

[00:19:18]See, the offense date happens to be a November 19th of 2016.

[00:19:23]And uh so, when did he get arrested out of state? He said November 19th of 2025.

[00:19:30]Okay. I'm going to need some proof of that.

[00:19:33]Cuz right now, according to the court filings, he was not arrested until December 8th.

[00:19:40]Again, even if he were arrested on December 8th, which is what my record show, that still is 150 days as of today, which means if we adjourn out, we are going to pass our 180 days.

[00:19:52]>> Were there any adjournments of the case while the matter was in the district court?

[00:19:58]That was Mr. Hertel, Your Honor. I do not know. I think there was a brief uh the preliminary exam was scheduled initially for December 23rd, which is right before Christmas. And then we stipulated The court has waived the 21 days, and it got pushed out to >> Because the 13th of January, maybe? So, you got a 2-to-3-week gap there. So, you actually, whatever number you calculate, add at least 14 days.

[00:20:23]Even then, Your Honor, if we're adjourned, we are going to go past our 180 days. Uh well, I don't know that because I don't know when he was actually arrested on it. But, if let's say that he was arrested on the 8th of December, uh That's 150 days as of today. Yep.

[00:20:47]That means we're at least as of today, we have another 30 days left. And then, if I add the 14 days for the days that you all agreed by stipulation to adjourn the pre- liminary exam, I'm now at 65 days, which puts me into the middle of at end of June, middle beginning of July almost. Yeah, end of June.

[00:21:10]So, we have 6 weeks to go to trial.

[00:21:13]So, his 180 days trial clock is not there.

[00:21:17]All right. Plus, I would have to have evidence that there's there is unavailability of witnesses despite the exercise of due diligence, things like that the court can consider an extension beyond the 180 days.

[00:21:32]But, I want you to be careful. And I'm also concerned about the appellate issue.

[00:21:42]If I forced you to have the hearing next Wednesday on the 768 information you are I'm going to make that ruling probably that day or the next day. It's uh I'm not even in the office.

[00:22:02]Um I I I'm really concerned that you're not thinking about the appellate issue. I guarantee you the very if and I don't know what the evidence is yet. I haven't read the preliminary exam and I have not yet read Ms. House's 768 notice.

[00:22:24]I guarantee if there were a conviction the very very first thing an appellate defender would do is file a claim of ineffective assistance for not agreeing to an extension when there's easily another 6 weeks of time to be better prepared for the new witnesses. Now, unless you're going to tell me that there's nothing in what the 768 stuff says that is a surprise including CVS.

[00:22:50]I don't know why I wouldn't grant it.

[00:22:52]Your Honor, I have spoken with my client about the pros and cons of the decision to push for the May 26th date versus to agree to the adjournment. He wants to push for the May 26th date.

[00:23:03]Your Honor's concerns are things we discussed.

[00:23:05]>> Yeah.

[00:23:06]Well, >> He wants to push for the May 26th date.

[00:23:09]Okay.

[00:23:11]Well, I think I have 6 weeks of flex time.

[00:23:17]And we've got uh today's the 8th. The trial set for the 26th.

[00:23:22]I've got uh two I've got at least three four weeks of time before I'm even at the 180-day trial clock window.

[00:23:30]Plus, I don't have any element evidence today presenting that there was uh lack of due diligence.

[00:23:36]Uh one moment.

[00:24:00]Let me just see if I have any other matters I need to know.

[00:24:27]Heather, would you go grand bar?

[00:24:29]Trial calendar.

[00:25:32]>> I know we talked about this before while in chambers. Separate from that, we're going to put that this question off to the side. You also had another request that you mentioned in chambers of bond modification. Yes, Mr. Rebello. Yes, your honor. We would respectfully motion to modify bond at this time. The purpose of bond is to ensure that an individual appears at court or proceeding. It is not meant to serve as a form of pre-trial sanction.

[00:25:59]While there is debate on the date, all parties agree that my client has been a resident of Wexford County Jail since December 8th and it is currently May.

[00:26:10]His wife he reports that his wife is due to have a child any day now and it is a medically complicated pregnancy or delivery at least. He And at the one hand, the court is saying we don't have any proof that he was extradited or the date of that happening for its reasoning on not adjourning and it's setting out a date.

[00:26:30]But at the same time, I know that the court has previously said, "Well, since there was an extradition, that's evidence of flight." Did he waive extradition?

[00:26:37]I don't know.

[00:26:39]Your honor, he he ultimately waived extradition. I'd have to look at my notes to see I So, I'm not sure. I think he may have initially said he was going to fight extradition ultimately waived. The situation is that he was under investigation for these charges for about somewhere between like 4 to 6 months. So, he knew this was being investigated when he up and quit his job, moved out of the place that he had, took him and his family to Kansas while he knew this was under investigation.

[00:27:06]And so, then we had to get the US Marshals to go to Kansas to find him, spent quite a bit of money to bring him back here. So, I think there's clear reason to be concerned about flight in this case because he knew it was under investigation, chose to leave while he knew the case was being investigated.

[00:27:21]And so, I have great concern that should he get out if he's able to travel that he would leave. He also has lived here in this area for um >> [snorts] >> a number of years now, but has also lived all across the country in Washington, and Louisiana, and Florida, and Kansas.

[00:27:36]So, his ties here are are somewhat limited and he does have ties in other places. Thank you, Mr. Rebento. Your Honor, it's my understanding he left, he was under investigation for a Masacki CPS case. That case was resolved. He left after that case was resolved. There might have been something criminal still pending, but it's my understanding he hadn't been charged with it, and the Masacki case had been resolved.

[00:27:57]Your Honor, it's people should not have to sit around forever waiting to see if they may or may not be charged for alleged criminal allegations that separate case with a lower evidentiary standard had already been resolved on.

[00:28:11]In consideration of that, Your Honor, we can again if the concern's flight, those can be we should bond requires the least restrictive means possible. We can address risk of flight with a tether. We can address risk of flight with community corrections check-ins. We can address it through other methods. And we would ask that the court maybe impose those methods instead. I understand the people's concern. I understand the court's concern.

[00:28:37]But if we are pushing an adjournment for an individual who's saying, "No, I want my speedy trial. I want to go to trial.

[00:28:43]I don't want this delayed. I believe the jury will find me not guilty.

[00:28:49]We should at least give them a chance of bond if by no fault of the clients it is being pushed off. Thank you. All right.

[00:28:55]Why did he go to Kansas? What drew him to Kansas specifically?

[00:29:01]Thanks.

[00:29:02]Go ahead.

[00:29:02]>> May I consult him?

[00:29:03]>> Yeah, of course.

[00:29:19]Your Honor, he said it's for me that his mother lives in Kansas and she was starting to have dementia and other health issues. So, they went out there to be by her. He used to have a business in this area because of everything that happened in the Misaki file and other files, he says his businesses failed. He wanted a fresh start. He wanted to be by his mom. You want to All right, so here's what the court is going to do and rule on these last two issues.

[00:30:03]Miss House, are you in court anywhere next Tuesday?

[00:30:17]I am not. Okay.

[00:30:20]Thank you.

[00:30:21]The court is going to reserve its ruling on the motion to adjourn and the bond today is going to bond modification today is denied. If you wish to bring it up again next Tuesday, you can because that's when we're going to have our evidentiary hearing objecting to the content of the uh 768 notice.

[00:30:50]All right? And we're going to set it We're going to say what time?

[00:30:55]9:30 on Tuesday here in the courtroom.

[00:30:59]Now, that's going to put a pinch, and I know you're probably going to have some difficulty with bringing physical witnesses.

[00:31:06]That's all right. You may present the evidence through some other means.

[00:31:10]Now, what that does is it puts the pressure on potentially the defense, which can call its own witnesses, and if they choose to call those actual witnesses, such as CVS, they can go get some subpoenas issued out. And if we need to adjourn it, then they can always request to adjourn and add more time.

[00:31:32]Then, I would That gives me, because it sounds like I've got to listen to an entire day's worth of recordings, gives me Wednesday to do it, since I'm not here Thursday and Friday.

[00:31:44]And next week is Monday's busy, Thursday, Friday, I'm not here the following Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday.

[00:31:53]Then I leave again. I'm only here for 1 day that week, and then I'm gone Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. So, you've got some very limited time. So, I've got 3 days that I'm here between trial date.

[00:32:06]So, Your Honor, my concern is that you know, a subpoena that I issue today isn't even going to be valid, I don't believe. No.

[00:32:16]Which means you can present [clears throat] any information that you want on Monday that can be in a physical form, right?

[00:32:27]And then I can [clears throat] make a ruling based upon that. Now, if any individuals need to be brought here, and the defense wishes for them to be brought here, then they can object. And then if they object, you therefore would need more.

[00:32:45]Bingo.

[00:32:49]And then we can address that. We'll allow the defense to also establish and prepare a brief on the 180-day trial clock window. I need time. I need to know when he was arrested. And then I need to know when he was presented in another court for extradition and when he fought the extradition. And then how many days they delayed the preliminary examination.

[00:33:22]And need to be able to explain to the court whether that those are accredited Sorry, accredited. Sorry. The word is credited to either the prosecution or the defense.

[00:33:34]Now, they also need to consider, probably, and that's all up to them, what other dates are they available? Cuz this is going to be a four-day trial.

[00:33:49]So, that's going to require the government the defense and the government to start thinking and specifically the defense cuz I know Miss House has a different arrangement with the AG's office.

[00:34:02]All right, who is going to handle all your other cases on the other dates?

[00:34:06]Because by next Tuesday, my staff will have every trial date possible that will cover four days.

[00:34:15]Okay? Now, while the defendant is saying, "Listen, I really want this. I want to push." And I appreciate that and I do take that into consideration. But what I really, really need to know is exactly on what date does the 180-day trial clock window end.

[00:34:34]Okay? Now, that trial clock window is not a solid wall like everybody thinks it is.

[00:34:40]Okay? Yes. And I can, pursuant to the court rule regarding pretrial release MCR 6.106, I can consider the likelihood of conviction, which by the way, I will have a pretty good image as of Tuesday when I get to see all this other evidence.

[00:34:59]And I've [clears throat] been practicing, I don't know how long this house has been, but over three decades, and all I've ever done is criminal law. And as a defense attorney, 80% of my caseload was CSE cases. So, I get to apply some discretion here. And while you may or may not think about this and that of quality issues, I do.

[00:35:26]So, and I guarantee you the law is not going to say, "Well, the defendant didn't care and pushed it."

[00:35:36]And then they're going to say, "But the defense attorney should have told him no."

[00:35:41]So, I appreciate that position, but that's not the analysis that I have to go through.

[00:35:47]So, as of today, the court does not grant any bond modification. I will adjourn that till Tuesday as well.

[00:35:54]So, next Tuesday, we've got a hearing set for, and this is going to be probably a whole day thing, starting at 9:30.

[00:36:04]We're going to be talking about the 768 admissibility. We're going to talk about motions to adjourn.

[00:36:12]And then we're going to talk about bond in the 180-day trial clock.

[00:36:17]And Ms. House, if you could please check with your new witnesses or whomever about availability. Now, particularly, you've got a expert witness.

[00:36:29]And we've already ruled that I've already made a ruling on that and her availability and witness availability pursuant to court rule 6.

[00:36:39]004 says I can consider witness availability and an expert witness I'm going to say here is a real a very important witness because of explaining to jurors certain facts. That's already what I've ruled earlier back on April 27th. All right. Anything else, Ms. House?

[00:36:59]Nothing today, Your Honor. Anything else, Ms. Rivera Pinto? Just for clarification, when do you want the written response to the 20 >> Before we have our hearing. Okay.

[00:37:10]Would Monday be enough time for Your Honor?

[00:37:12]I Yeah. I I don't have to write it. I just have to read it.

[00:37:19]So, all right. Thank you very much. We are adjourned.

[00:37:26]Okie dokie, friends. That seems complicated and messy and uh a poopoo show.

[00:37:32]But sometimes that's how it rolls. You know, I think that was a good example of a judge having to think beyond the immediate hearing. It's not just about making a ruling, it's about making one that can survive later review. But I'm curious what you think about how it was handled. So, take a moment, let me know down in the comments. And if you enjoyed this video, check out one of the other two that are on the screen right now.

[00:37:52]Hi, Ellie.

[00:37:53]Thanks for watching.