GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (WOOD) — The defense team for a former Michigan State Police detective sergeant is asking a judge to keep the murder case in federal court after the Michigan Attorney General’s Office asked for the case to be sent back to state court.

Brian Keely, of Grand Rapids, is charged with second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter in the death of Samuel Sterling. 

In late August, U.S. District Court Judge Hala Jarbou decided that the case against Keely would be moved to federal court. Jarbou agreed with Keely’s defense team that the case belonged in federal court because Keely — though he was employed by MSP — was acting as a member of a federal task force when he hit Sterling with an unmarked cruiser in Kentwood, killing him.

But the AG’s Office in September filed a motion asking for the case to be sent back to state court. The office pointed to a 2023 appellate ruling that says the law allowing for removal to federal court “applies only to current federal officers, not formal federal officers, even if the defendant held federal office at the time of the act alleged by the prosecution.”

In a brief filed Monday, Keely’s defense pushed back, saying the case should stay in federal court.

“This Court must deny the State of Michigan’s Motion as it premised upon factually inaccurate grounds and wholly frivolous,” the brief reads.

Keely’s lawyers presented three main arguments as to why the appellate ruling cited by the AG’s office should not apply.

First, they said, Keely’s retirement actually took effect July 1 — three days after Keely’s lawyers requested that the case be moved to federal court. Therefore, Keely was actually a current federal officer at the time, they argued.

Second, Keely’s defense argued that Keely’s case can also be moved to federal court because Keely was acting under the supervision of another federal officer at the time. The appellate ruling presented by the AG’s Office does not address this, the defense argued.

Finally, Keely’s lawyers held that the appellate ruling “is not binding authority upon this Court” and also asserted that the case cited by the AG’s Office “stands alone on an island,” saying that no other court has ruled similarly.