INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

To: D/Sgt. Scott Singleton, Michigan State Police

From: Mike Cheltenham, Chief Assistant Prosecuting Attorney
Subject: Use of Force Investigation, MSP Incident No. 10-0001005-20; CTN 21-
0018, 21-0019, 21-0020
Date: March 4, 2021
CC: Carol Siemon, Ingham County Prosecuting Attorney

On Tuesday, November 10, 2020, Lansing Police Department (LPD) officers arrived
at the 800 block of Baker Street to investigate a fight. The 911 callers reported several
people fighting in the street, including a person using a baseball bat. Upon arrival, LPD
officers made contact with Johnathon Hardy. After interacting with Mr. Hardy, Officer
Alex Rojas decided to arrest him for a City of Lansing ordinance violation. Upon his
arrest, Mr. Hardy physically struggled with Officer Rojas. Multiple LPD officers arrived on
scene to assist Officer Rojas in the arrest. Officers used closed fist strikes to Mr. Hardy’s
head and face. They ultimately had to deploy a TASER to subdue him.

The following week LPD requested the Michigan State Police (MSP) investigate
officers Alex Rojas, Morgan Schafer, and Alec Slobin for their actions during Mr. Hardy’s
arrest. On January 5, 2021, the Ingham County Prosecutor’s Office (ICPO) began review
of the MSP investigation to determine if any criminal charges against the officers is
appropriate. ICPO examined the following materials:

1. MSP Incident No. 10-10005-20

2. LPD Incident No. LLA 2051911745
3. Officer Alex Rojas’ statement
4. LPD Department Manual Section 600.07–Response to Resistance
5. Photos of Johnathon Hardy’s injuries taken at Sparrow Hospital
6. photos of Officer Alex Rojas’ injuries taken at Sparrow Hospital
7. Surveillance video from McNamara Party Store
8. Surveillance video from City of Lansing’s camera at the corner of Baker and
Lyons Streets
9. In-car camera video from LPD officers at the scene
 10. Body worn camera video from LPD officers at the scene
11. Computer aided dispatch (CAD) notes
12. 911 calls reporting the incident

After reviewing the materials, ICPO found the following evidence:

On the night of the incident, Johnathon Hardy met a small group of individuals
outside the McNamara Party Store. When he arrived, Mr. Hardy carried with him a
backpack and a plastic Wiffle Ball bat. He placed these items by an outside cooler and
appeared to have a friendly conversation with the group. The conversation became
heated and the group entered a white sport utility vehicle (SUV) parked down the street
from the party store. Mr. Hardy followed the group to the SUV. One of the male
occupants exited the SUV and confronted Mr. Hardy. The two men then engaged in a
physical fight. During the fight, a female exited the SUV, picked up Mr. Hardy’s
backpack, and returned to the SUV. After an unexplained break in the video, Mr. Hardy
walked back to the party store and several people followed him. Mr. Hardy retrieved the
Wiffle Ball bat from where he set it and waved it at the group. The female, who had
previously grabbed Mr. Hardy’s backpack, went inside the party store and retrieved a
metal baseball bat. Bat in hand, she chased after Mr. Hardy until both were no longer on
camera. The party store surveillance recorded a shirtless male from the original group
enter and drive the white SUV at Mr. Hardy. Mr. Hardy jumped out path of the vehicle to
avoid injury. The surveillance stopped at this point and resumed with Officer Rojas’s
arrival on scene.

When Officer Rojas arrived, his body worn camera (BWC) recorded an individual
from the white SUV point toward Mr. Hardy and say, “He started this.” When Officer
Rojas attempted to get Mr. Hardy’s attention, Mr. Hardy responded, “don’t play with me”.
Mr. Hardy leaned toward Officer Rojas with clenched fists, then turned and walked away.
While Officer Rojas questioned a store employee, Mr. Hardy returned and engaged
Officer Rojas again. Mr. Hardy approached Officer Rojas while yelling “Ain’t shit
happen!” When he yelled this Mr. Hardy stepped toward Officer Rojas. Officer Rojas
pushed Mr. Hardy and instructed him to stay back. The two exchange words. At this
point, Officer Melinda Hutchings arrived on scene. Mr. Hardy again walked away but told
Officer Rojas, “If you can get me in that car, good luck.” In reply, Officer Rojas instructed
Mr. Hardy to leave. The two exchanged a few more comments before Officer Rojas said,
“we got a call there was someone out here fighting and you are out here in the street
and you just threw that Wiffle bat.” At that point, Mr. Hardy inquired, “Did you see what
happened before that, bruh?” Officer Rojas replied with “I saw you throw that Wiffle bat.”
Mr. Hardy then repeated his question to Officer Rojas about the seeing any of the events
before Mr. Hardy threw the bat. Officer Rojas responded, “I am asking you what’s going
on?” Mr. Hardy yells back, “Shut up, cop.” Officer Rojas reported that it was after this
remark that he decided to arrest Mr. Hardy for loud and boisterous conduct, which is
prohibited under the City of Lansing ordinances.

When Officer Rojas moved toward him, Mr. Hardy backed away saying, “Get off me,
I didn’t do shit, bro.” Officer Rojas, with the assistance of Officer Hutchings, pushed Mr.
Hardy against the party store wall. Mr. Hardy attempted to break free but officers were
able to hold him while they waited for additional officers. Mr. Hardy repeated several
times that he did nothing wrong. After about two minutes, Mr. Hardy broke free of Officer
Hutchings’ grip and grabbed Officer Rojas from behind. Mr. Hardy pushed Officer Rojas
up against the wall several times asking, “How does it feel…?” With his arms wrapped
around Officer Rojas’s torso, Mr. Hardy began to squeeze hard enough that the officer
had difficulty breathing.

Officers Christie Chiles and Morgan Schafer arrived on the scene to assist. Officer
Chiles deployed her TASER at Mr. Hardy. The TASER had minimal effect. Mr. Hardy
continued to struggle as he and the officers fell to the ground. While on the ground,
Office Schafer delivered approximately ten strikes to the Mr. Hardy’s head while the
others attempted to him. When it appeared that Schafer’s strikes were ineffective, Officer
Rojas delivered additional strikes to the head and face. Officer Rojas reported he did this
because Mr. Hardy attempted to grab the TASER originally used by Officer Chiles.

Officers Alec Slobin, Aaron Bush, and Sgt. Corey Campbell arrived while the group
was still on the ground. Sgt. Campbell attempted to get Mr. Hardy’s left arm behind him
for handcuffing. While Sgt. Campbell held Mr. Hardy’s arm, Officer Slobin struck Mr.
Hardy once in the face with a closed fist. Officer Slobin reported he did this to distract
Mr. Hardy while Sgt. Campbell attempted to gain control of Mr. Hardy’s arm. This strike
failed to distract Mr. Hardy so Officer Slobin delivered a second strike that stunned Mr.
Hardy long enough to allow the other officers to secure Mr. Hardy’s arms behind his
back. Officers transported Mr. Hardy to Sparrow hospital for medical evaluation after
being handcuffed.
 On January 5, 2021, the Ingham County Prosecutor’s Office received warrant
requests for Officer Rojas, Officer Schafer, and Officer Slobin. We reviewed the
submitted materials for the sole determination of whether a crime was committed and
whether charges should be authorized. While much of the police behavior was
concerning in light of our changing societal norms, and historical wrongs, the officers’
actions did not rise to the level of a violation of the criminal law, when reviewed in light of
laws and policies in place at the time of this event.

A police officer may use reasonable force to subdue a person being lawfully
arrested.1 However, the arrest “must be performed in a proper manner, e.g. the arrest
must be made without excessive force….”2 The legality of the officer’s conduct or arrest
is an element of the offense that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. A
defendant may resist unlawful police conduct.3

Based on the 911 calls and the computer assisted dispatch (CAD) information, it is
clear that Officer Rojas was investigating a fight involving multiple subjects and a bat.
When Officer Rojas arrived, he observed Mr. Hardy discard what appeared to be a Wiffle
bat. The observation, coupled with the 911 calls, gave Officer Rojas sufficient
reasonable suspicion a crime was committed to briefly detain Mr. Hardy for further
investigation. As Officer Rojas attempted to investigate, Mr. Hardy acted aggressively
toward him. Mr. Hardy’s actions escalated to the extent that, under current City of
Lansing ordinance, Officer Rojas believed that Mr. Hardy was in violation of City of
Lansing Ordinance No. 664.0. This ordinance prohibits any disturbance or fighting in
public, disturbing the peace by loud and boisterous conduct, or uttering profane,
obscene, or offensive language at another person. An officer may arrest a person for a
felony, misdemeanor, or ordinance violation committed in their presence.4

1
Delude v Raasakka, 291 Mich 296 (1974); Tape v Howe, 79, Mich App 91 (1989)
2
Brown v Shavers, 210 Mich App 271, 276-277 (1995), quoting Ross v Consumers Power, 420 Mich 567,
660 (1989)
3
People v Moreno, 491 Mich 38, 814 (2012)
4
MCL 764.15(1)(a)
 To determine whether a crime was committed, the ultimate question is whether the
officer’s use of force exceeded that which was reasonably necessary to make the arrest.
To make that determination, the United States Supreme Court has noted, “the question
is whether the officers' actions are “objectively reasonable” in light of the facts and
circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation. 5”
As Mr. Hardy increased his level of resistance, the officers were legally allowed to use
corresponding levels of physical control to respond. While we do not endorse the
behavior of the officers, we review only to determine whether the evidence supports
beyond a reasonable doubt that the officers’ actions violated a criminal statute. We have
determined that the evidence does not support proof beyond a reasonable doubt that
Officers Rojas, Schafer, and Slobin committed a crime; therefore, we are declining
prosecution in all three warrant requests.

5
Graham v Connor, 490 U.S. 386; 109 S. Ct. 1865; 104 L. Ed2d 443 (1989)