Scoring of OV 4; Psychological injury; MCL 777.34(1)(a); Within-guidelines sentence; Proportionality; Reasonableness; People v Posey; Ineffective assistance of counsel; Sufficiency of the evidence; AWIGBH; Malicious destruction of personal property; Domestic violence; Credibility

The court held that the trial court did not err by scoring OV 4 at 10 points, that defendant’s within-guidelines AWIGBH sentence was proportionate, and that she failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel. It also rejected her sufficiency of the evidence challenge. She was convicted after driving her car into her former boyfriend and pinning him between two vehicles. The trial court sentenced her to 36 to 120 months for AWIGBH. On appeal, the court held that OV 4 was supported by a preponderance of the evidence because the victim became emotional at the preliminary exam, said the situation was bothering him, testified to “lasting affects,” and the PSIR reported he was “mentally and physically exhausted” from the assault. It also held that the within-guidelines sentence was presumptively proportionate and that defendant did not identify unusual circumstances overcoming that presumption. The court noted the trial court considered her prior assaultive misdemeanors, continuing danger to the victim, jail misconduct involving attempts to contact him, need for treatment, and lack of remorse. Finally, because OV 4 was properly scored, counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to it. Affirmed.