Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Today at a pre-trial conference before Judge Richard Skutt the Wayne County Prosecutors Office
(WCPO) announced that it will not retry Desmond Ricks, 51 of Detroit. On May 26, 2017, in a
Stipulated Order of WCPO and the defense agreed that the Defendants Motion for Relief from
Judgment should be granted . The charges of Second Degree Murder, Felony Firearm and
Habitual Offender Second Offense were vacated and the court entered an order granting a new
trial and released the defendant on a personal bond.
Prosecutor Worthy said, We worked collaboratively with the University of Michigan Innocence
Clinic to secure a reanalysis of the ballistic evidence in this case. The ultimate result was that we
agreed to the motion requesting a new trial on May 26, 2017. After thoroughly examining the
remaining evidence in the case we have concluded that we cannot proceed to trial, and today we
agree that Mr. Ricks should be released.
1. Between September 16, 1992, and September 23, 1992, Mr. Ricks was tried for the murder of victim
Gerry Bennett.
2. The Detroit Police Department (DPD) Firearm Lab examined two spent projectiles recovered from
victims body and a firearm owned by Defendants mother that was recovered from the home
Defendant shared with his mother.
-more-
3. On DPD Lab Number 515-92, DPD Firearms Examiners David Pauch and Robert Wilson concluded
that:
a. The recovered pistol was chambered in .38 special caliber and possessed 6 right-twisting
lands and grooves
b. The two recovered projectiles were .38 special caliber and possessed traces of lands and
grooves
c. Comparison between test shots from the recovered pistol and the recovered projectiles
resulted in a match; the spent projectiles recovered from the victims body had been fired
from the recovered pistol.
2. Mr. Ricks was convicted of Second Degree Murder and Felony Firearm and on October 10, 1992, he
was sentenced as a Habitual 2nd Offender to 30 to 60 years imprisonment consecutive to and after
a mandatory 2 year imprisonment respectively.
3. Mr. Ricks direct appeals to the Michigan Court of Appeals (See Docket No. 160459) and Michigan
Supreme Court (See Docket No. 160459) were unsuccessful, as was his first Motion for Relief from
Judgment.
4. The defense filed a Successive Motion for Relief from Judgment on June 1, 2016.
5. In September, 2016, the Third Circuit Court ordered the People to Respond to Defendants
Successive Motion for Relief from Judgment in accordance with MCR 6.504(B)(4) and 6.506(A).
6. Between September, 2016, and December, 2016, the People conducted an inquiry into the claims
made by Defendant in his Successive Motion for Relief from Judgment. On December 2, 2016, the
People responded in opposition to Defendants Successive Motion for Relief from Judgment.
8. Upon the retirement of this Courts predecessor, this matter came to Judge Richard Skutts attention.
9. On March 20, 2017 after reviewing the Defense and Prosecution pleadings and with the agreement
of the parties the Court ordered the available firearms be reanalyzed by the Michigan State Police
(MSP) Crime lab. According to DPD, only the spent bullets were available for retesting; the firearm
had been destroyed.
2
-more-
10. The Defense and Prosecution signed a stipulated order for the retesting of the spent projectiles
which this Court signed and entered on March 20, 2017.
11. On March 21, 2017, the People submitted the Retesting Order and an official request for Retesting
to the MSP Crime Lab.
12. On April 20, 2017, the MSP Crime Lab Released Laboratory Report MD17-1738. In it, D/Sgt. Dean
Molnar noted the spent projectiles were members of the .38 caliber/9mm class with an indeterminate
number of right twisting lands and grooves. These results were reported to the Court by the
Defense and Prosecution at a May 12, 2017, status conference.
13. D/Sgt. Molnar reported inconclusive comparative findings that could not corroborate DPDs match,
but his classification of the spent projectiles was largely consistent with that reported by the DPD
Lab the spent projectiles were members of the .38 with traces of lands and grooves.
14. Because the inconclusive results were insufficient, the People sought additional advice and explored
other avenues for additional firearms analysis. One of those avenues was the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE).
15. Prior to the May 12, 2017, status conference with the Court and Defense, the People made contact
with (BATFE). Conversations between the People and the BATFE resulted in the BATFEs
recommendation that the MSP Lab examine the spent projectiles against the FBI General Rifling
Characteristics (GRC) Standards. In addition to producing a list of firearms that could have fired the
suspect bullets, the application of the GRC included using a mathematical formula to determine the
number of lands and grooves on damaged projectiles.
16. On May 22, 2017, the People requested that MSP conduct an analysis of the spent bullets against
GRC Standards.
17. On the afternoon of May 24, 2017, the People received a Corrected Copy of MD17-1738 from
D/Sgt. Molnar. In it, D/Sgt. Molnar:
a. Reaffirmed his inconclusive conclusion that the spent projectiles could not be identified as
having been fired in the same firearm
-more-
3
b. Reaffirmed his earlier conclusion that both projectiles were members of the .38 caliber/9mm
class lead bullets with right twisting lands and grooves
c. Added that one of the two spent projectiles displayed 5 right-twisting lands and grooves.
18. The Corrected Copy of MD17-1738 was forwarded to the Defense on the morning of May 25,
2017.
Actions by the Court in Light of the Prosecution and Defense Stipulated Facts
The court recognized the following stipulated conclusions of the parties and recommended:
1. That the ultimate implication of the Corrected Copy of MSP Lab Report MD17-1738 contradicts the
conclusion reported by the DPD in Report Number 515-92; namely that a spent projectile displaying
5 right-twisting lands and grooves is excluded from having been fired from a firearm with 6 right-
twisting lands and grooves;
2. That the Corrected Copy of MSP Lab Report MD17-1738 and the contradiction of the findings
rendered by the DPD Firearms Lab in 1992 undermines the reliability of the firearms evidence used
to convict Defendant;
3. In light of the Corrected Copy of MSP Lab Report MD17-1738 and its effect on the firearms
evidence used to convict Mr. Ricks the Defense and the Prosecution agree that Defendant must be
given a new trial;
4. On May 26, 2017 the Court granted the Defendants Successive Motion for Relief From Judgment
and vacated his October 12, 1992 convictions. The Court granted the requested relief of a new trial,
and a Pretrial Conference date was scheduled for June 1, 2017.
5. On June 1, 2017 the prosecution informed to the Court that they would not conduct a new trial and
the case against Mr. Ricks was dismissed
#####