Michigan Court of Appeals remands lifer Ray’s case to the trial court a third time, orders judge to have evidentiary hearing including testimony about another suspect who was likely the real killer, retains strict jurisdiction
Atty. Tiffany .P. Howell argues Roger Carlos Ray case before the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Atty. Tiffany P. Howell argued case strongly at COA, stressing multiple violations of Brady v. Maryland by DPD, which hid evidence in “miscellaneous file.”
“It just boggles my mind that you’re even contesting this. . .The police have no right whatsoever to do what they did in this case, and that fact alone for me is sufficient to let this guy out of prison”–Michigan COA Judge Stephen Borrello, Aug. 7, 2024
Newly exonerated Lavone Hill speaks out for Ray’s release and that of hundreds more wrongfully convicted individuals
Please DONATE TO VOD at: https://www.gofundme.com/donate-to-vod
By Diane Bukowski
Nov. 3, 2024
DETROIT — “The courts are dealing with my case, which involves actual innocence, but it seems they are more concerned with being exposed,” Roger Carlos Ray told VOD in a phone call today.
“Others in here like me are dealing with the same thing that I’m going through–I can name them. I’ve lost my mother and father, everybody in my family, I’ve had COVID six times, and been rushed to the hospital with a failing heart.”
Ray was arrested and convicted in 1993 for the gruesome murder of apartment manager John Holmes, who had been robbed, shot to death, and stuffed in the incinerator of the Westville Apts. at 6017 Grand River, Detroit, on Easter Sunday, April 18, 1987.
Ray won a Court of Appeals (COA) ruling Oct. 3, remanding his case back to the trial court for a third time after it failed to fully comply with earlier rulings.
This time the COA mandated an evidentiary hearing involving another suspect in the case, Edmond Justice Wright, who may have committed the murder for which Ray has been in prison 31 years. The full COA ruling gives a comprehensive run-down of events in the case, many of them mentioned in VOD’s earlier article on the Ray case. Complete ruling is at: http://voiceofdetroit.net/wp-content/uploads/Roger-Carlos-Ray-COA-10-3-24.pdf.
P. I. Scott Lewis
Wright, originally a police suspect in the crime, became the prosecution’s chief witness against Ray at trial in 1993. It was not disclosed to the jury that Wright pled guilty to attempted first-degree criminal sexual conduct (rape) in 1989, and was serving a five-year term of probation f0r the crime when he testified against Ray.
There was no weapon or bullet evidence tying Ray to the murder, although a DPD report shows that one bullet and another fragment were extracted from Holmes’ head. The prosecution’s entire case against Ray for the murder of Holmes hinged on what Wright told homicide investigators in three separate statements.
Westville Apts. on Grand River where murder took place.
Wright did not name Ray until the third statement. In that statement, he claimed to have seen Ray covered with blood in the apartment where they both stayed, which was also blood-soaked, on Easter Sunday April 19, 1987. He claimed Ray told him he had shot Wright in the head and taken his safe full of money. Wright’s testimony regarding the written statements at trial was very vague and contradictory.
Police and prosecutors also concealed a multitude of other evidence pointing to Wright in a “miscellaneous file” found by private investigator Scott Lewis in 2018. That file included handwritten police notes from the earlier 1987 “miscellaneous” file: 1) A Michigan identification card for Edmond Wright, found wedged between the coach cushions in Holmes’ living room. Wright claimed he had not been in Holmes’ apartment for several months, and 2) A note about a “Mr. Mitchell” with information about the crime, who had left his phone number for police to call back, which they never did. Lewis found “Mr. Mitchell,” interviewed him and obtained a sworn affidavit from him.
See: http://voiceofdetroit.net/wp-content/uploads/Mitchell-Notarized-Affidavit-copy-1.pdf
Roger Carlos Ray with daughters Carla Mason (l) and Rashawn Ray at 3 yrs. old (r).
Ray said he is well versed in the law now, having studied it in prison libraries, and has drafted many of his pleadings himself. He said he just had a video visit with his daughter Rashawn Ray and is rebuilding family ties with his children now.
Rashawn Ray told VOD about her father, “I was three years old when my father went to prison. We talk often. He’s a great dad and grandpa. I can only imagine how things would have been if he had been here. He knows all my kids–I have four, 14, 11, 8 and 4, and he calls and checks on them, asking about their grades and everything.”
Her sister Carla Mason, who has two daughters, said, “He has a heck of a family waiting for him. When we listened to the oral arguments August 7, we both just called each other crying.” (Oral arguments in video below.)
Lavone Hill on his release
Lavone Hill, just released due to his wrongful conviction after 22 years, became a close friend of Ray’s in prison, according to both men. Ray calls Hill a “freedom fighter.” Hill said Ray was the first prisoner to reach out to him.
“He’s a real good guy, clean cut, very spiritual,” Hill told VOD. “We’ve had to fight for our lives, I’m talking about innocent men being in prison.
“He was one of the first guys I met in prison. He told me if you want to get out of prison, you’ve got to get in the law library and fight for yourself. You go to trial on any charge, you’re gonna get cooked. Hundreds and hundreds of guys that are in prison are innocent, but we are treated like nothing but numbers, not human beings.”
Oral arguments on Ray’s appeal were held Aug. 7, 2024 in front of Michigan Court of Appeals Judges Christopher Murray, Stephen Borrello and Philip Miriani, with attorney Tiffany P. Howell representing the defense. Howell stressed multiple violations by Detroit Police of Ray’s disclosure rights under Brady v. Maryland, leading Judge Borrello to tell the prosecution, “It just boggles my mind you’re even contesting this.”
See complete oral arguments on Ray’s case from 18:40 to 45:16 below
The Court of Appeals issued its ruling on October 3, 2024, following a previous ruling in 2020 that sent the case back to the trial court t0 assess new evidence because it was not barred by court rules as the trial court had said. That order said the court MAY hold an evidentiary hearing, but the Oct. 3 order says it MUST hold one.
“We agree in part, vacate the order denying defendant’s motion, and remand to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing on whether the newly discovered evidence satisfies the fourth prong under People v Cress, 468 Mich 678, 692; 664 NW2d 174 (2003), and/or constitutes material evidence under Brady v Maryland, 373 US 83; 83 S Ct 1194; 10 L Ed 2d 215 (1963). We retain jurisdiction.”
Not only did the Court of Appeals overturn Third Circuit Court Judge Miriam Saad Bazzi’s Nov. 17, 2022 denial of Ray’s third motion for relief, but Presiding Judge Christopher Murray issued a separate order ensuring that the COA panel retains jurisdiction It reiterates that the COA has ordered an evidentiary hearing, after which the COA panel itself is to receive and review the trial court’s ruling in order to address any remaining issues.
“Any challenges to the trial court’s rulings on remand must be raised in this appeal,” Judge Murray wrote. “The Clerk of the Court is directed to reject the initiation of a new appeal from such an order.”
VOD has previously noted that some Third Circuit Judges have been ignoring repeated remands from higher courts, denying relief again, with defense attorneys forced to initiate brand new appeals. VOD’s legal advisor has identified 30 appellate rulings that have been repeatedly sent back to the trial courts because of repeated non-compliance.
For list of 30 cases remanded by Appellate Courts to Third Judicial Circuit Court, see:
http://voiceofdetroit.net/wp-content/uploads/30-CASES-REMANDED-BY-APPELLATE-COURTS.pdf
RELATED:
***********************************************************************************
