The trial was scheduled to begin Monday but was moved to make room for an evidentiary hearing that will decide if evidence taken from Lynn and Michael Higgins' home will be included at trial.
On Oct. 17, Lynn Higgins' attorney Allen M. Wolf argued five motions before the case goes to trial. Circuit Court Judge Daniel Kelly postponed the trial for two of Wolf's motions, setting an evidentiary hearing for Thursday to decide what evidence will be presented at trial.
CURTILAGE, 4TH AMENDMENT AND PLAIN VIEW QUESTIONS
Lynn Higgins requested to suppress evidence recovered from her home on June 13 and 14, when animal control Officer Ken Jewell investigated complaints about the condition of the home. The motion stated Jewell did not obtain a search warrant, but looked through the windows around the front, side and back of the home, observing multiple dogs in the house.
On June 14, Jewell made contact with Michael Higgins. According to Allen M. Wolf's motion, the couple stated the officer needed a search warrant to enter the home. During preliminary examination on July 13, Jewell testified he "came to an understanding" with Michael Higgins that he could enter the home without a warrant.
Granting a motion to suppress evidence requires an evidentiary hearing. Kelly wrote that the court is required to hold the hearing before it is able to examine "the totality of circumstances surrounding the contested search and seizure."
Wolf also filed a motion of limine, which prevents certain information from being presented at trial. The motion was to exclude Jewell's "opinion testimony" delivered at preliminary exam. The attorney said Jewell was allowed to make editorial comments during his testimony, such as about the condition of the home and dogs, that should not stand at trial.
In his response, Kelly wrote he will rule on this motion after the evidentiary hearing, at which Jewell will likely testify on the motion to suppress.
Kelly denied Wolf's motions for bill of particulars, which addresses the "vagueness" of the charges. Kelly said Lynn Higgins is sufficiently advised of the charges against her.
A motion to quash information was also denied. Wolf argued the law which Lynn Higgins is charged under is "unconstitutionally vague," because the definition of "sanitary conditions" of where the animals are kept is not clearly defined. Kelly disagreed.
"The term 'sanitary conditions' sufficiently provides people of ordinary intelligence with notice of what conduct the statute prohibits," he wrote.
HUSBAND AND WIFE BLAMING EACH OTHER
Lastly Wolf filed a motion to separate the trials of Lynn and Michael Higgins, as they would be antagonistic because in court he will try to push the blame on Michael Higgins.
"(Lynn Higgins) claims that her defense at trial will be that Mr. Higgins was tasked with certain duties involving the animals in question and that (he) failed to complete these duties, resulting in whole or in pertinent parts," Kelly wrote.
Considering Michael Higgins is the only one with a full-time job, one that requires him to travel for business, I would say Lynn Higgins is the one who is more to blame for the conditions in the home and the cruelty inflicted on the animals. Not that he's not guilty, too, but she is MORE guilty than he, IMHO.
(Times Herald - Oct 21, 2016)
Earlier:
- Michigan: At least 70 dogs seized from Cottrellville home of Lynn Higgins and Michael Higgins
- Michigan: Nearly 100 dogs rescued: When does 'unsanitary' become cruelty?
- Michigan: 98 dogs, 3 cats taken from Lynn Higgins' and Michael Higgins' house in St. Clair County
- Michigan: Animal Control officer describes the filth Lynn Higgins and Michael Higgins are accused of forcing more than 100 animals to exist
- Michigan: Accused dog hoarders Lynn Higgins and Michael Higgins to face trial Oct. 25
