Judge denies motion to remove Oakland County prosecutors from Oxford shooter's mom's case

DETROIT — A judge has denied Jennifer Crumbley's request to remove Oakland County prosecutors from her case, in part because she does not have jurisdiction to rule on it, and will issue sanctions to Crumbley's attorneys for filing a frivolous motion.

Crumbley, the mother of the Oxford High School shooter, asked in early March for Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Cheryl Matthews to disqualify Prosecutor Karen McDonald from her case because McDonald allegedly "cannot be trusted." Michael Dezsi, Crumbley's attorney, said McDonald had "violated the Court Rules, entered into secret agreements with two star prosecution witnesses, and has unethically engaged two public relations firms to run a smear campaign against the Crumbleys in an effort to sway public opinion and taint the jury pool."

McDonald called these claims "meritless" and said the request was improper. She said the only motivation for the request is to generate headlines and divert attention away from Crumbley's actions.

In a ruling Tuesday, Matthews said she does not have jurisdiction to rule on a motion to remove prosecutors because circuit court judges can only decide on motions for a new trial, for judgment of an acquittal, to withdraw a plea or to correct an invalid sentence. Dezsi's motion does not all under any of those categories, she said.

"At its heart, the instant Motion is a collateral attack on the judgment because it seeks to raise issues that are more properly raised on appeal or in the Motion for Judgment of Acquittal and/or for New Trial," Matthews wrote. "Therefore, the Court finds that it lacks jurisdiction to decide the instant Motion and defers to the appellate court’s jurisdiction."

Matthews said some of the issues raised in this motion were already brought up in Crumbley's original request for a new trial or for a judgment of acquittal, making this request redundant.

"The Court finds that the Motion was filed for an improper purpose and is not warranted by existing law," Matthews wrote. "Thus, the Court concludes that the motion was filed in violation of (state law). Pursuant to (state law), a sanction for the violation will be reflected in the Court’s decision to approve reimbursement of appellate counsel fees with regard to the time spent preparing and filing the Motion."

Dezsi said the case against Crumbley has been "off the rails from the beginning," and Matthews' ruling doesn't do anything to right the wrongs. He said he plans to appeal.

"We have witnessed a smear campaign, paid for with taxpayers' money, and witnesses who received secret deals to testify for the prosecution. In the face of such mounting evidence surrounding the prosecutor’s misconduct and mishandling of the case, the trial court denied Mrs. Crumbley’s motion to remove the prosecutor finding that the court lacks jurisdiction to hear such motion," Dezsi said in a statement.

The Oakland County Prosecutor's Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but has previously said there is "zero legal basis" for Dezsi to ask Matthews to remove McDonald's office as prosecutors.

Prosecutors have maintained they didn't violate court rules by not giving Crumbley's attorney copies of so-called proffer agreements they made with Oxford High School counselor Shawn Hopkins and former Dean of Students Nick Ejak. Both Hopkins and Ejak met with shooter Ethan Crumbley, Jennifer's son, and his parents the morning of the November 2021 shooting. The proffer agreements said prosecutors cannot use any statements made during an initial meeting to prove their guilt.

Dezsi said the agreements the two employees had with prosecutors were necessary to disclose because their testimony during the Crumbley parents' trials included their "subjective impressions" of their meeting, so the jury should also have known they had an incentive to testify for the prosecution.

He said the prosecutor's office failed to comply with the letter and spirit of discovery requirements and McDonald violated her constitutional duty to disclose material or favorable evidence to the defense.

Dezsi also accused the prosecutor's office of engaging in a "smear campaign" by using what he called social media influencers and public relations firms to shape public opinion of the Crumbleys. McDonald said following the January motion hearing that her office did not have the staff it needed to handle the influx of media requests that came in after the shooting, which is why the firms were hired.

Crumbley has filed multiple motions since her conviction last year, asking for a dismissal of her case or a new trial, to be released from prison while her appeals are pending and now for the prosecutor's office to be removed from the case.

Matthews denied most of Crumbley's motion for a new trial or dismissal of her case, but has not ruled on the other motions yet. The only matter she is mulling in the motion for a new trial or dismissal is the issue of the proffer agreements, which she said was a discovery violation she found to be "very very concerning."

A jury convicted Crumbley of four counts of involuntary manslaughter in February 2024, marking the first time in the U.S. a parent was convicted of manslaughter for a mass shooting carried out by his or her child. Matthews sentenced her to 10-15 years in prison.

A separate jury also convicted her husband, James, who received the same prison sentence. James Crumbley has also filed a motion for a new trial.

Four students were killed in November 2021 shooting at Oxford High School: Hana St. Juliana, 14; Justin Shilling, 17; Tate Myre, 16; and Madisyn Baldwin, 16.

Prosecutors said Crumbley acted in a grossly negligent way in storing a gun and ammunition where her son could access it and that she failed to control her child to keep him from harming others.

_____