Sentencing; Reasonableness & proportionality; People v Posey; Scoring of OV 13 (continuing pattern of criminal behavior); MCL 777.43(1)(c) & (2)(a); Scoring of OV 19 (interference with the administration of justice); MCL 777.49(c); Mitigating factors; People v Bailey

The court held that defendant failed to show that his sentence was unreasonable or disproportionate. He was convicted of AWIM and felony-firearm for shooting the victim at a party. In a prior appeal, the court affirmed his convictions but remanded for resentencing on the ground that the trial court erred in scoring OV 13. On remand, the prosecution presented evidence as to OV 13 and the trial court recalculated defendant’s OV scores but imposed the same sentence, with credit for time served. In the present appeal, the court rejected his argument that the trial court abused its discretion by resentencing him to the same term of years, and that his sentence was unreasonable and disproportionate. It noted the trial court determined by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant previously committed a felony home invasion and third-offense domestic violence, “and appropriately calculated 25 points under OV 13.” Upon further review of his “criminal history, the trial court also found [he] attempted to influence a trial witness, adding 10 points to [his] score for OV 19, under which points are assessed for interference with the administration of justice.” As to “the seriousness of the offense, the trial court stated that defendant’s crime was a ‘very serious offense’ that ‘really could’ve been a murder,’ if the officer who resuscitated the victim had not arrived so quickly. Defendant did not contest any of the trial court’s findings, including his OV scores, nor does he do so on appeal.” In addition, the arguments he did raise on appeal were not a basis for resentencing. Affirmed.