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 AgraharkarSTATE 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 GeneralSTATE 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