In 2016, defendant
was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct for a rape and robbery
committed in 1996. The victim was unable to identify her attacker. In 2015, the
rape kit that had been prepared immediately after the assault was finally
tested, and the DNA from the kit matched defendant. Several DNA experts
testified at trial, one of them, over defendant’s objection, by two-way
interactive video. The Court of Appeals affirmed defendant’s conviction in an
unpublished opinion. One judge concurred separately. The Supreme Court has
granted defendant’s application for leave to appeal to address whether
permitting an expert witness to testify by two-way interactive video, over
defendant’s objection, denied defendant his constitutional right to confront
witnesses and, if so, whether this error was harmless.