Trial ordered for man accused in road rage shooting incident

STERLING HEIGHTS — A 21-year-old Clinton Township man who was accused of firing a gun during an alleged road-rage incident in Sterling Heights last year, will stand trial in Macomb County Circuit Court.

Following a preliminary examination hearing in 41A District Court in Sterling Heights Jan. 12, Judge Kimberley A. Wiegand ordered Logan Shea bound over to circuit court for trial on all charges. The hearing was conducted by Assistant Macomb County Prosecuting Attorney Erica Clute-Cubbin.

Shea was charged with a list of weapons-related offences including discharging a weapon in a vehicle, a 10-year-felony and assault with a dangerous weapon, a four-year felony. He was scheduled to be arraigned before Macomb County Circuit Court Judge Joseph Toia on Jan. 26.

According to a news release from the Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office, Sterling Heights police responded to the area of 15 Mile and Schoenherr roads on Nov. 16, 2025, after a reported road rage incident. A caller stated that a man driving a white Chevrolet Silverado, later identified as Shea, allegedly pointed a gun at him. The caller provided officers with a description of the driver and the vehicle’s license plate number.

It is further alleged that while officers were speaking with the caller, additional units reported hearing gunshots in the vicinity of 19 Mile and Saal roads. The vehicle involved in that incident was also described as a white Silverado, according to the news release. Officers proceeded to the address associated with the license plate provided by the caller, which was identified as Shea’s residence. Officers obtained a search warrant and reportedly recovered multiple firearms.

“The conduct alleged in this case — discharging a firearm from a vehicle and pointing a handgun at another motorist — represents an extreme and unacceptable threat to public safety,” Macomb County Prosecutor Peter J. Lucido said in a prepared statement.

Shea’s attorney, James Makowski, told the Sentry that “there’s a lot more going on here than meets the eye.”

“The facts that were established at the preliminary examination bring a lot more questions than answers to the table,” Makowski said. “The eyewitness who allegedly was menaced by a firearm initially couldn’t identify my client and the description he gave doesn’t match my client. My client is looking forward to his day in court.”