Document Category: Testimony about Behavior During Pregnancy

This brief argues that evidence of abortion contemplation, lack of prenatal care, and other lawful prenatal decisions is irrelevant and unduly prejudicial when offered to prove postnatal homicidal intent. It further contends that statements obtained after police repeatedly misinformed the suspect about her right to appointed counsel must be suppressed because any waiver of counsel was not knowing, intelligent, or voluntary under the federal and Michigan constitutions.

This amicus brief argues that the State and lower courts relied upon irrelevant, unfairly prejudicial evidence (i.e. internet search history regarding abortion, abstention from prenatal care) to “articulate a motive for a murderous act on a newborn child.” The brief discusses the unfair prejudice that flows from admission of this evidence given stereotypes about women and motherhood (pages 5-6).  It also highlights empirical research showing that abstention from prenatal care can stem from “maternity care deserts” and “limited maternity care access,” rather than “murderous” intent (pages 6-7).