Sentencing; Scoring of OVs 3, 4, 7, 8, & 13; MCL 777.33(1)(d); Reliance on reasonable inferences from the record evidence; People v Earl; MCL 777.34(1)(a); MCL 777.37(1)(a); MCL 777.38(1)(a); MCL 777.43(1)(c) & (2)(a); Waiver; People v Kowalski; Ineffective assistance of counsel; Failure to make a futile objection; People v Savage

The court held that defendant was not entitled to resentencing based on ineffective assistance of counsel given that the trial court properly assessed a total of 100 OV points, with the result that he would remain in OV level VI and his minimum guidelines range would not change. Thus, it affirmed his sentences of 67 to 120 months for AWIGBH and 100 to 180 months for unlawful imprisonment. He challenged the scoring of several OVs on appeal. The court noted he “waived his arguments when trial counsel indicated at sentencing that he had ‘no . . . additions, corrections, or deletions.’” But because he bootstrapped an ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on the failure to challenge the OV scoring, the court reviewed the scoring of OVs 3, 4, 7, 8, and 13. It concluded that the trial court did not err in scoring 10 points for OV 3. “Considering the nature and characteristics of the assault, the injuries suffered and described, and the fact that the police transported JK to the hospital for examination, it is reasonable to infer that JK ‘required’ medical treatment.” The court accepted the prosecution’s concession of error in the scoring of 10 points for OV 4. It upheld the 50-point score for OV 7, finding that “the record fully supported a conclusion that defendant treated JK with ‘excessive brutality’” and that his “conduct was designed to substantially increase JK’s fear and anxiety. While she was being restrained and viciously assaulted for an extended period of time through biting, punching, spitting, hair-pulling, and choking, defendant repeatedly threatened to kill JK. One can reasonably infer from this evidence that defendant’s conduct was designed to substantially increase JK’s fear and anxiety.” It also upheld the 15-point score for OV 8. The fact that they lived together did “not mean that there could be no asportation or that JK could not be held captive.” In addition, he held her down and brutally assaulted “her for at least 20 minutes, which was beyond the time necessary to commit unlawful imprisonment.” Finally, the trial court did not err in scoring 25 points for OV 13. In 2017 and 2018, defendant pled guilty to unlawful imprisonment, AWIGBH, and attempted AWIGBH, all of which “constituted offenses against a person.” Trial counsel was not ineffective for waiving challenges to properly scored OVs.