Animal Law Newsletter—Fall 2018

State Bar of Michigan SectionAnimal Newsletter Law Fall 2018 Table of Contents Court Dogs Have Their Day .............1 Court Dogs Have Their Day Co-Editor’s Note ...............................2 By Margaret M. Sadoff ‘Claws and Effect’ .............................6 The Purpose of the Animal Law his article summarizes recent developments in Michigan law regarding use of court Section: Thoughts from Section support dogs, briefly reviews other states’ legislation regarding use of court support Members ........................................8 T dogs, and provides basic information on court dog standards and training. Recent Animal Law News ................8 Update on Nonhuman Rights The Shorter Case Project’s Efforts to Free In its June 7, 2018 opinion, the Michigan Court of Appeals (COA) reversed and Chimpanzees: Tommy the Chimpanzee .................................12 remanded for new trial a criminal sexual conduct (CSC) case in which the victim witness was accompanied by a court support dog during her trial testimony. In Shorter, defendant Nominating Committee Report ......13 was found guilty of third and fourth degree CSC against a friend as she slept. The victim Upcoming Events ...........................14 witness’s had agreed to share a bed with defendant but stated she had not agreed to any sexual contact.1 The trial court allowed the victim witnesses, a non-disabled adult, to Treasurer’s Report – 2017-2018 2 FYTD ............................................15 testify accompanied by a support dog, relying on People v Johnson, a case involving use of a support dog for a child victim witness in a CSC case. Legislative Committee Update to According to the COA opinion, the trial court reasoned that the presence of the sup- September 17, 2018 ....................15 port dog would help the witness to control her emotions which would be beneficial to Section Member Julie I. Fershtman both the witness and the defendant. The trial court gave a limiting instruction to the jury to Receive SBM Roberts P. twice, once before the victim witness’s testimony and again at the end of trial, instructing Hudson Award .............................18 the jurors not to allow the use of a support animal to influence their credibility determina- Social Media & Lawyers in 2018....19 tion or their verdict. The COA ruled that the trial court erred in allowing a support dog to accompany the victim witness during her trial testimony. It ruled that Johnson was not controlling as the Shorter case did not involve a child witness. Furthermore, it ruled that the error was not harmless because it “undermined the reliability of the verdict.”3 The COA found that the jury was entitled to assess the victim witness’s emotional state as part of its credibility determination. The court further opined that “allowing support animals for able- bodied adults would be unprecedented” as the court was unable to find a single case in any jurisdiction involving the use of a support dog by a non-disabled adult witness.4 The COA concluded that a “fully abled adult witness may not be accompanied by a support animal or support person while testifying.”5 The court expressed its hesitation to expand the use of a support dog to a non-disabled adult, suggesting that such an “unprecedented change” be made by legislation, court rule, or Michigan Supreme Court deci- sion.6 In a dissenting opinion, Judge O’Brien agreed that the trial court had erred but that the error was harmless. The dissent found the majority’s reasoning, that the dog’s presence had been weighed against defendant, to be “unduly speculative.”7 continued on next page Animal Law Section Newsletter Animal Law Section Council Co-Editor’s Note 2017-2018 elcome to the second issue of the Newsletter for 2018. We are now in our W23rd year as a section. The Section had its initial official meeting at the 1995 State Bar of Michigan Annual Meeting. Our Section is the first state-wide animal Chairperson law section in the United States; something that we can all take pride in. Ann M. Griffin, Bingham Farms Our lead article is a detailed discussion of court support dogs including the Shorter case now on appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court, recent legislation Chairperson-Elect in Michigan (HB 5645) now signed into law, the Courthouse Dogs Foundation Allie A. Phillips, Lansing which advocates for the use of courthouse support dogs, and a summary of similar laws in other states. Secretary We have articles on other topics such as an article about member Rebecca Jennifer L. Pierce, Harrison Wrock and her animal law-related work, an update on the Nonhuman Rights Township Project (a frequent Newsletter feature), a brief op-ed on the purpose of the Section, the Nominating Committee report, and the financial report for the section. Please see the calendar of recent events on the last page to get an idea of the high level of Treasurer interest in animal law across the country. Anna M. Scott, East Lansing I do want to mention two things related to the Section. First, the July 2018 issue of the Michigan Bar Journal was a special Animal Law issue. We owe a big Term Expires 2018 thanks to all members who contributed articles. It is available online at http:// Kate Brindle, Whitmore Lake viewer.zmags.com/publication/d150842a#/d150842a/1. The special issue is a good Stephanie N. Olsen, Troy refection of the high regard for the section by the State Bar of Michigan. (The Stephen A. Seman, Saginaw first special Animal Law issue was in December 2013.) Second, we now have 270 members which is a 7% increase in membership from last year. Term Expires 2019 We continue to print the issue in all color including photographs and graphics. Richard C. Angelo, Jr., Davison We are using better quality paper. This greatly increases the visual appeal of the Christopher Iannuzzi, Lansing Newsletter. The photographs are much clearer with this approach. Kieran Patrick Marion, Lansing As always I will make my standard request, please remember that this is your newsletter, too. Helpful articles are always needed. In fact, if we can get one good Brittany L. Taratuta, Ferndale main article for each issue, we can do the rest. Please consider writing an article that will be of interest to your fellow Section members. Term Expires 2020 I have had several members suggest or volunteer articles and we should look Donald R. Garlit, Canton forward to these articles. Joshua Cooper Holman, Detroit Meredith R. Sharp, Okemos Donald Garlit, Newsletter Co-Editor [email protected] Ex-Officio Laurie A. Hrydziuszko, Lansing Court Dogs Have Their Day continued from page 1 Commissioner Liaison Richard L. Cunningham, Detroit The Michigan Statute HB 5645 (PA 282 of 2018 or MCL 600.2163a) was signed into law on June 28, Newsletter Editors 2018 with an effective date of September 27, 2018.8 The law amends and replaces Donald R. Garlit MCL 600.2163 (which addressed court support persons) and essentially codifies the (734) 451-9950 Court of Appeals Shorter ruling. The new law lays out the specifics for use of court [email protected] support dogs and handlers (as well as support persons) for specified witnesses. PA Ann M. Griffin 282 applies to use of court support dogs for specified crimes which include assaul- (313) 310-3411 tive type crimes and crimes against vulnerable adults. Prior to this statute, Michigan [email protected] law did not specifically permit or exclude court support dogs during witness testimony; it was left to the trial courts to determine. PA 282 allows a support dog and 2 Fall 2018 Leelanau County facility dog, Gunther, with two adoring fans. Matty - He is the Facility Dog with Sexual Assault Services, Child Gunther was trained by Canine Companions for Independence. Advocacy Center, Bronson Battle Creek (Calhoun County) Photo courtesy of Margaret Sadoff Photo courtesy of his guardian Amber Depuydt handler to sit with, or be in close proximity to, a witness for use of court support dogs by witnesses from either party. during courtroom testimony. The statute defines a witness The Arkansas statute also provides that either party may voir as “an alleged victim of an offense” who is: 1) a child witness dire prospective jurors as to whether the presence of a facility under age 16; 2) a person age 16 or older with a developmen- dog would create undo sympathy for the witness or prejudice tal disability;9 or 3) a vulnerable adult.10 This definition does to the defendant. The Virginia statute applies to witnesses not include non-victim witnesses or non-disabled adult wit- in any criminal proceeding – it does not specify that the nesses, although use of court support dogs by such persons is witness be a victim or a child or a disabled adult. Alabama not expressly prohibited by the statute. The law requires use law applies to a victim or witness (undefined) testifying in of Assistance Dogs International (ADI) standards11 for dogs certain legal proceedings. Arizona and Louisiana laws allow specially trained as courtroom support dogs. A facility dog courts to consider use of court support dogs for other crime is defined as a dog graduating from a professional two-year victims or other witnesses not defined by statute. Thus, at ADI accredited facility or training program.12 The new law least four states have statutes that consider use of court dogs also requires a notice of intent when a support dog (or sup- for witnesses other than children, vulnerable adults, or adults port person) is to be utilized at trial. PA 282 does not affect with developmental or intellectual disabilities. Michigan law regarding use of service dogs in courtroom settings. Court Support Dog Training and Standards ADI sets standards for training of assistance dogs, which Other State Court Dog Statutes include guide dogs and service dogs, and accredits programs Michigan joins twelve other states with statutes on use of that train and provide assistance dogs.

Load more