## Facts

- Archie L. Couch, Jr. heard his car alarm outside his Detroit office and saw Alfonso Tucker, Jr. in Couch’s vehicle after a window was broken.
- Couch, carrying a licensed revolver, confronted Tucker and directed him to accompany Couch so police could be called.
- Tucker exited the vehicle and ran away.
- Couch fired three shots at Tucker as Tucker fled; Tucker died from the gunshot wounds.
- Couch was charged with manslaughter and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.
- Couch asserted the killing was justified under Michigan’s common-law “fleeing felon” rule permitting deadly force to apprehend a fleeing felon.

## Issues

1. Whether Tennessee v. Garner altered Michigan criminal law governing a private citizen’s use of deadly force to apprehend a fleeing felon.
2. Whether the court should judicially modify or abrogate Michigan’s common-law fleeing-felon rule for purposes of criminal liability.
3. Whether retroactive application of any judicial change would raise ex post facto or due process fair-warning concerns.

## Decision

- The court held that Tennessee v. Garner did not automatically modify Michigan criminal law and did not directly govern a private citizen’s criminal liability.
- The court declined to judicially change the common-law fleeing-felon rule as a matter of state law and policy, leaving any revision to the Legislature.
- The court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trial court’s denial of Couch’s motion to quash the information.
- Because the court refused to change the rule, it did not decide the retroactivity/ex post facto questions.

## Legal Principles

- Federal constitutional limits announced in a civil Fourth Amendment case do not, by themselves, rewrite state criminal offenses or defenses.
- The power to define state crimes and justifications rests with the state; constitutional rulings may constrain government actors but do not compel a state to criminalize particular conduct.
- A Fourth Amendment “unreasonableness” standard for police seizures is not a direct substitute for the elements of homicide offenses or defenses in state criminal prosecutions.
- Policy choices about when deadly force is justified are for the Legislature where the Legislature has adopted or acquiesced in the governing common-law rule.
- Creating separate, direct criminal standards for police and private citizens based solely on Fourth Amendment doctrine raises serious equality and constitutional concerns.

## Conclusion

The court ruled that Garner did not alter Michigan criminal law and refused to judicially revise the common-law fleeing-felon doctrine, allowing the manslaughter and felony-firearm prosecution to proceed under existing state law.


People v. Couch, 436 Mich. 414 (1990)