Appeal Court ruling

THURSDAY, SEPT. 3 — The Michigan Appeals Court in a unanimous ruling has overturned the conviction of a Ingham County dentist on all 15 counts of criminal sexual conduct.

In August 2012, an Ingham County jury convicted Dr. Wendell Alan Racette, 69, of five counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct first degree and 10 second-degree counts. His victims were all former pediatric patients. The cases stemmed back decades and involved boys. He was sentenced to 15 to 30 years in prison.

The higher court ruled that jurors were improperly subjected to testimony by former staffers of alleged verbal and physical abuse against other pediatric patients in his care.

"The testimony by Racette’s former staffers did not have any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the charges at issue more or less probable other than that he had a defective character and must have acted in conformity with that character during the events at issue," the court wrote.

“The staffers presented a picture of Racette as a dentist who had a propensity to mistreat his child-patients; indeed, the testimony — taken together — strongly suggested that he deliberately inflicted pain beyond that necessary for treatment, which one might infer made him a sadist. Because the evidence was not relevant for a purpose other than character-to-conduct, the trial court erred when it allowed the staffers to testify about Racette’s tendency to treat his patients poorly."

The court concluded that the errors arising from allowing this testimony likely resulted in Racette's conviction.

"Given the nature and extent of the testimony, we cannot conclude that the errors were harmless.  Had perhaps just one former employee, and one former patient, testified about Racette’s cruelty, the testimony might have been overshadowed by the weight of the evidence properly admitted," the court wrote.

"But in this case the prosecution presented a parade of witnesses whose combined testimony — even to the extent that it was relevant for a proper purpose — tended to show that Racette had a terribly flawed character. Because the testimony painted Racette as a wicked man who has a propensity to abuse children, it is likely that the jury used the testimony for an improper character to conduct purpose.

“Stated another way, there was a significant danger that the jury found that Racette committed the even more outrageous acts described by the complainant because those acts were consistent with Racette’s propensity to mistreat children. "

The unanimous ruling sends the case back to the county for a possible retrial. If prosecutors decide to retry the case, it will be the third time Racette has faced trial on the charges. In December 2011, a trial ended with a hung jury.