Larry Donaldson better known as Lil Larry was convicted in 2006 for the murder of Detroit legend Blade Icewood. Little is know about Larry, legend has it he was a notorious hit man. Larry is currently serving a life sentence for multiple murders. Besides being a total scum bag, he also wins the award for the best mugshot. Below are few highlights from his State Of Michigan appeal that was obviously denied in 2008. If anyone has any more information about this crazy f*** please send it to firstname.lastname@example.org. I would like to do some more investigating.
Docket No. 269674
Defendant’s convictions in this case arise from his alleged shooting of Darnell Lindsay, also known as “Blade,” as he sat in his car outside of a carwash. At the time of his death, Lindsay used a wheelchair after having been shot, and partially paralyzed, a few months earlier. Defendant first argues that the trial court erred in admitting, pursuant to MRE 404(b), evidence of a prior home invasion during which defendant allegedly obtained the firearm used to shoot Lindsay, and testimony from two men regarding defendant’s alleged statements about Lindsay made in a barbershop a few weeks before he was killed. We disagree.
At trial, the prosecution presented testimony establishing that defendant and Thomas committed a home invasion against Rodney Duane Harrison and his wife, taking a .45 caliber weapon from the home, which was recovered from defendant’s home in Texas after Lindsay was killed, and was determined to be the weapon used in that shooting. The prosecution also presented testimony from Marcus Johnson, the owner of a Detroit barbershop, that two to three weeks before Lindsay was killed, defendant came into the shop and described how he and another person put Lindsay in a wheelchair; defendant also said that “he was going to get Blade.” Johnson observed a black handgun in defendant’s possession. Roger Forney, who worked in the barbershop, testified that the day before Lindsay was killed, defendant discussed the prior shooting of Lindsay, indicating that he did not shoot Lindsay, “the other guy” did. Forney also testified initially that he saw defendant with a black handgun; later, he said that defendant told him that he had a gun, but Forney did not actually see it.
Defendant argues that this evidence was inadmissible under MRE 404(b). We disagree.
We note initially that defendant waived any objection to the barber’s statement that defendant said he “was going to get Blade” by conceding the admissibility of this statement before the trial court.5 However, because defendant raised a general objection to the admission of the evidence of the home invasion and the barbershop testimony at the time the prosecution moved to admit it, this issue is otherwise preserved for appeal.
As to defendant’s preserved claims of error, MRE 404(b) is not implicated because the evidence was logically relevant and did not involve an intermediate inference of character. VanderVliet, supra at 64. Harrison’s testimony regarding the home invasion was offered to directly link defendant to the shooting of Lindsay, by linking defendant to the weapon used to shoot Lindsay. Similarly, Johnson’s testimony that he heard defendant say, “he was going to get Blade,” did not operate through an intermediate inference of character; rather, it tended to show that defendant intended to harm Lindsay, and was directly relevant to defendant’s identity as the shooter, or as an aider and abettor in Lindsay’s killing. Indeed, this evidence was admissible under MRE 401, without regard to MRE 404(b), because it tended to make the existence of facts of consequence to the determination of the action more or less probable, and the significant probative value of this evidence was not outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. MRE 403. Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting it.