OF MICHIG:
OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
cBRS
P.O. Box 30736
LANSING, MicrGAn 48909-8236
BILL SCHUE
ATTORNEY GENERAL,
November 6, 2017
Hand Delivery
Court of Claims Clerk's Office
Michigan Hall of Justice
925 W. Ottawa St.
P.O. Box 30185
Lansing, MI 48909
Re: Davontae Sanford v State of Michigan
Court of Claims No. 17-000220-MP
Dear Clerk of the Court:
Enclosed for submission, please find the Defendant's Answer to Complaint
together with the respective Proof of Service in relation to the above-referenced
matter.
‘As always, should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate
to contact our office directly.
Very truly yours,
Med Kae
Mark E. Donnelly
Joseph T. Froehlich
Assistant Attorney General
‘ivil Litigation, Employment & Elections
517.373.6434
DonnellyM@michigan.gov
MED/ems
Enclosures
Cew/ enclosures: William H. Goodman / Julie H. Hurwitz
Nick Brustin / Emma Freudenberger / Vishal AgraharkarSTATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF CLAIMS
DAVONTAE SANFORD,
Plaintiff,
v
STATE OF MICHIGAN,
Defendant.
William H. Goodman (P14173)
Julie H. Hurwitz (P34720)
Kathryn Bruner James (P71374)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
1394 East Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, Michigan 48207
813.567.6170
Nick Brustin
Emma Freudenberger
Vishal Agraharkar
Attorneys for Plaintiff
99 Hudson Street
Now York, New York 10013
212.965.9081
No. 17-000220-MP
HON. MICHAEL J. TALBOT
Mark E. Donnelly (P39281)
Joseph T. Froehlich 71887)
Assistant Attorney General
Attorney for Defendant
P.O. Box 30736
Lansing, Michigan 48909
517.373.6434
PROOF OF SERVICE
Carrie M. Scepka states that on the 6" day of November, 2017, she served
Defendant State of Michigan’s Answer to Complaint and this Proof of Service upon
the following:
William H. Goodman
Julie H. Hurwitz
Kathryn Bruner James
1394 East Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, Michigan 48207
by first class mail, postage prepaid thereon.
Dated: November 6, 2017
Nick Brustin
Emma Freudenberger
Vishal Agraharkar
99 Hudson Street
New York, New York 10013
fe ;
Coun Nenad
Carrie M. Scepka, Legal Secretary
Michigan Dep't of Attorney GeneralSTATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF CLAIMS
DAVONTAE SANFORD,
Plaintiff,
No. 17-000220-MP
v
HON. MICHAEL J. TALBOT
STATE OF MICHIGAN,
Defendant.
William H. Goodman (P14173) Mark E. Donnelly (P39281)
Julie H. Hurwitz (P34720) Joseph T. Froehlich (P71887)
Kathryn Bruner James (P71374) Assistant Attorney General
Attorneys for Plaintiff Attorney for Defendant
1394 East Jefferson Avenue P.O. Box 30736
Detroit, Michigan 48207 Lansing, Michigan 48909
313.567.6170 517.373.6434
Nick Brustin
Emma Freudenberger
Vishal Agraharkar
Attorneys for Plaintiff
99 Hudson Street
New York, Now York 10013
212.965.9081
DEFENDANT STATE OF MIGHIGAN’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
JURISDICTION
1. The allegation is admitted.
2. The allegation is admitted.
3. The allegation is admitted.NATURE OF THE ACTION
4, The allegation is admitted insofar as it describes the relief sought by
Mr. Sanford. The remainder of the allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the
reason that the Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief
as to its truth and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
5. The allegation is admitted,
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
6. The allegation is admitted in part, insofar as it alleges Mr. Sanford
was fourteen years old at the time of the crimes for which he was convicted. The
remainder of the allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs
The allegation is admitted.
8. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
9, The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
10. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.11. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
12. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
13, The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
14. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
15. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
16. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
17. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.18. ‘The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs
19. The allegation is admitted.
20. ‘The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
21. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
22, The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
23. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
24, The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to ite truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
25. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.26. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a helief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs
27. ‘The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
28. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs
29. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
30. ‘The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
31. The allegation is admitted insofar as it accurately depicts a colloquy
between the judge and Smothers. ‘The remainder of the allegation is neither
admitted nor denied for the reason that the Defendant lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth and leaves Plaintiff to his
proofs,82. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs
33, ‘The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowlodge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
34, ‘The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs,
35. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
36. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
87. ‘The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
38. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. The Michigan State Police Report speaks for
itself,39. The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.
40, The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowlodgo or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. The Michigan State Police Report speaks for
itself.
41. The allegation is admitted insofar as it alleges that Michigan State
Police submitted its report to the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office.
42. ‘The allegation is neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the
Defendant lacks knowledge or information eufficiont to form a beliof as to its truth
and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. The allegation remainder of the allegation is
neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the Defendant lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth and leaves Plaintiff to his
proofs,
43, The allegation is denied insofar as the allegation suggests that the
People of the State of Michigan or the Attorney General is bound by the findings or
investigation of the Michigan State Police. The remainder of the allegation is
neither admitted nor denied for the reason that the Defendant lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth and leaves Plaintiff to his
proofs. The Michigan State Police Report speaks for itself.44. The allegations is admitted insofar as it alleges that Wayne County
Prosecutor's Office submitted a joint stipulation secking to set aside Plaintiff's
conviction and release him from custody. The remainder of the allegation is neither
admitted nor denied for the reason that the Defendant lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth and leaves Plaintiff to his
proofs,
45. ‘The allegation is admitted.
46. ‘The allegation is admitted
CLAIM FOR RELIEF
COUNT 1
47. The Defendant incorporates by reference the above paragraphs as
though fully stated herein,
48. The allegation is admitted insofar as Mr. Sanford alleges, based on the
clear and convincing evidence standard, that (1) the new evidence demonstrates
that he did not perpetrate the crimes in this case and was not an accomplice or
accessory to the acts that were the basis of the convictions, (2) his convietions were
vacated based on this new evidence, and (8) the case was dismissed based on this
new evidence, See MCL 691.1755(1). The remainder of the allegation is neither
admitted nor denied for the reason that the Defendant lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth and leaves Plaintiff to his,
proofs,By statute, the prosecuting attorney has the right to file an answer and
contest the complaint. MCL 691.1754(3). The Wayne County Prosecutor's Office
has been consulted and disagrees with the Attorney General's position, but will not
be filing an appearance or separate answer.
Wherefore, the Attorney General respectfully requests that the above-
captioned matter be set for hearing to determine the amount of award for relief in
this matter,
Respectfully submitted,
BILL SCHUETTE
Attorney General
Met be
Mark &. Donnelly (39281)
Joseph T. Froehlich (P71887)
Assistant Attorneys General
Attorneys for Defendant Stato of Michigan
P.O, Box 30736
Lansing, Michigan 48909
(517) 873-6434
Dated: November 6, 2017