Sufficiency of the evidence; Assault with intent to commit sexual penetration & assault by strangulation; People v. Snell; “Strangulation or suffocation” defined; MCL 750.84(b)(2); People v. Meissner; Credibility of witnesses; People v. McGhee; People v. Wright; People v. Ortiz; People v. Lemmon; People v. Winters; Great weight of the evidence; People v. Stiller; Whether the trial court properly sentenced the defendant as a fourth habitual offender due to alleged errors in the presentence investigation report (PSIR); People v. Lucey; People v. Malkowski; People v. Grant; Whether he was convicted based on the perjured testimony he claimed the prosecution knew to be false & failed to correct; People v. Smith; People v. Herndon; People v. Wiese; Giglio v. United States; United States v. Martin (8th Cir.); Ineffective assistance of counsel; Failure to raise as an issue on appeal as to the prosecution’s alleged failure to correct false testimony; People v. Jordan; People v. Rodgers; People v. Reed; People v. Pratt

The defendant did not show that he was entitled to relief under either a sufficiency of the evidence or great weight of the evidence theory. Also, it was not an abuse of discretion for the trial court to find that he was previously convicted of the felony of aggravated battery with a firearm, which constituted a third previous felony conviction and provided the basis for sentencing him as a fourth habitual offender. Further, he did not show that the victim provided perjured testimony that the prosecution failed to correct. Finally, he was not denied the effective assistance of counsel. He was convicted of assault with intent to commit sexual penetration and assault by strangulation. He was sentenced as a habitual offender (fourth offense) to serve concurrent sentences of 300 to 450 months in prison. He did not contest that any specific element of either crime was unsupported by sufficient evidence, but argued that victim-M’s testimony was not credible, whereas his version of events was accurate. Defendant testified that he grabbed M “by the neck and pushed her backwards after they argued when he discovered her looking through his pants pockets, and that he then left.” M testified that, “without provocation, defendant choked her and tried to hold her down on the couch while saying that he was going to have intercourse with her.” M “described wrestling with defendant as he continued to choke and push her, and as she was bent over the couch, pushed against the wall, and forced into a bathroom.” She further stated that “defendant unbuckled her pants while restraining her on the couch, and momentarily pulled down her pants as she was bent over the couch, and that she eventually escaped while brandishing a knife after taking advantage of defendant exposing himself.” M’s “testimony alone provided sufficient evidence to support defendant’s convictions.” Also, there was evidence of bruising around M’s neck, supporting her testimony. Finally, her “statements to her aunt and to police immediately following the incident were substantially consistent with her trial testimony.” Thus, the evidence was sufficient to support defendant’s convictions for both offenses. Affirmed.