People of Michigan v. Richard Kenneth Pullen

Summary

In this consolidated decision, the Michigan Supreme Court held that MCL 768.27a, which makes evidence of a defendant's other listed offenses against minors admissible 'for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant,' irreconcilably conflicts with MRE 404(b)'s bar on propensity evidence, but that the statute prevails over the court rule because it is a substantive enactment resting on policy considerations beyond the orderly dispatch of judicial business and thus does not infringe the Court's exclusive authority over practice and procedure under Const 1963, art 6, § 5. The Court further held that evidence admissible under MCL 768.27a remains subject to MRE 403 balancing, with the propensity inference weighed in favor of probative value rather than prejudicial effect; it affirmed Watkins's convictions because the errors in admitting the other-acts testimony were harmless, and it vacated the judgments below in Pullen because the trial court misapplied MRE 403 in excluding a 1989 police report. Justice Marilyn Kelly, joined by Justices Cavanagh and Hathaway, dissented, contending that MCL 768.27a unconstitutionally invades judicial rulemaking authority and would have reversed Watkins and affirmed the exclusion in Pullen.