Sentencing; Proportionality; People v Posey; Presumption that within-guidelines sentences are proportional

Holding that defendant’s within-guidelines sentences did not violate the principle of proportionality, the court affirmed. He was convicted of CSC I and II for sexually assaulting a minor. He was sentenced to 180 to 540 months for CSC I and 71 to 180 months for CSC II. The court concluded he failed to “overcome the presumption that his within-guidelines sentence was proportional.” He specifically cited “his age and that he had no history of prior convictions or substance abuse. As the prosecutor argues, the trial court is not specifically required to consider an adult defendant’s age, although it is a factor that may be considered.” As to his lack of prior convictions, “there was evidence that he had engaged in other uncharged acts of sexual assault. ‘A judge is entitled to rely on the information in the presentence report, which is presumed to be accurate unless the defendant effectively challenges the accuracy of the factual information.’ . . . Defendant did not challenge the PSIR as to these other sexual assaults.” The court noted that a jury found him “guilty of multiple counts of CSC. Defendant took advantage of his position of trust with the victim and her father, and he served the victim and her friend alcohol on the night of the offense. Further, defendant’s act of seeking out and sexually assaulting the victim again after the charged offense suggests that he was not remorseful of what he had done. Between [his] actions with the victim and the other potential victims mentioned in the PSIR, defendant’s conduct appears not to have been an isolated incident of sexual assault. For these reasons, the trial court did not abuse its discretion” in sentencing him within the guidelines.