Michigan appeals judges recently tossed the conviction of Joseph Morrison, a defendant tied to the 2020 plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, ruling that the kidnapping charge could not be treated as a violent felony for terrorism purposes; the case was sent back for a new trial and drew sharp reactions from both Morrison’s lawyer and the state attorney general.

In 2020, a dozen people were tied to a clumsy plot to abduct Governor Gretchen Whitmer, and the prosecutions that followed became a focal point for debates about entrapment and overreach. Some defendants were cleared, while others were convicted and given long sentences after trials that drew heavy media attention. The operation never looked sophisticated, and many observers questioned how real the actual threat to the governor had been.

Joseph Morrison was among those convicted in 2022 and received a sentence of four to 20 years on combined counts, plus additional time related to a felony firearm charge. On appeal, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled the kidnapping charge did not qualify as a violent felony under state law, which undercuts its use as a basis for the terrorism-related charge. Because of that legal defect, the court vacated Morrison’s conviction and sent the case back to Jackson County for a new trial.

The Michigan Court of Appeals on Tuesday vacated the conviction of a Jackson County man alleged to have provided aid to a 2020 plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Joseph Morrison was convicted in 2022 of gang membership felonies, felony firearm and providing material support for terrorist acts in relation to his alleged role in support of a kidnapping plot of the Democratic governor that prosecutors said was led by Adam Fox and Barry Croft Jr. during the COVID-19 pandemic. Morrison was sentenced to four to 20 years in prison on the gang and terrorism support convictions and two years on felony firearm.

[…]

The panel ― made up of Judges Thomas Cameron, Mark Boonstra and Brock Swartzle ― vacated Morrison’s conviction and remanded the case back to Jackson County Circuit Court for a new trial. All three judges are appointees of Republican former Gov. Rick Snyder.

“Given that the trial court specifically instructed the jury to consider kidnapping as a violent felony and that the jury heard considerable testimony about the plot to kidnap Gov. Whitmer, the likelihood that defendant was actually convicted, at least in part, on an invalid basis tainted the jury’s verdict,” according to the unanimous decision.

Michael Faraone, an appellate attorney for Morrison, said he was happy with the decisions and added, “It’s always a great day when a court delivers justice.”

“In over 30 years of practicing law, I have never reviewed a trial more violative of due process than this one,” Faraone said.

Attorney General Dana Nessel, whose office handled the case, said the decision, released just two days after arguments in the case, was “completely and irredeemably nonsensical, outrageous and irresponsible.” The judges’ decision “diminishes and whitewashes” the case, Nessel said, and “sends a deeply dangerous message, in a fraught and perilous time.”

The appeals court highlighted a core problem: jurors were told to treat kidnapping as a violent felony, which formed a legal bridge to the terrorism charge. That instruction, the panel said, could have led jurors to convict on a legally faulty premise and therefore tainted the overall verdict. The judges saw enough uncertainty about the legal basis that a retrial was the only proper remedy.

Morrison’s appellate lawyer publicly celebrated the decision, saying the court had corrected a serious injustice in a case he described as rife with due process violations. Those comments underline how defense attorneys view the appeal as a check on prosecutorial decisions made during a chaotic period of the pandemic. For critics of the original prosecutions, the ruling represents a legal victory and a reminder that constitutional protections must be preserved even in politically charged cases.

Attorney General Dana Nessel pushed back quickly and forcefully, calling the appeals court’s move irresponsible and dangerous. Her office argued the decision downplays the seriousness of the conduct alleged and diminishes the harms the prosecution said it sought to prevent. That clash between prosecutors and appellate judges frames what will likely be a contentious next chapter in court.

The remand for a new trial means Jackson County courts will have to revisit evidence and legal theory, and prosecutors must decide whether to retry Morrison on retooled charges or seek other resolutions. The practical result for Morrison is immediate: his conviction is vacated, and the sentence that had kept him behind bars is no longer in force while the process unfolds. For observers, the case is another example of the judiciary parsing the limits of how certain crimes get categorized under state law.

This episode sits inside a larger legal and political debate about pandemic-era policing, federal and state prosecutions, and the role of undercover operations. Judges and lawyers are now sorting through decades-old legal categories being applied to modern and often messy facts, and that work will determine how similar cases get handled going forward. The next months are likely to bring more court filings and, potentially, another trial that tests both the evidence and the legal framework used in 2022.