Sufficiency of the evidence; AWIM; MCL 750.83; Intent to kill; Circumstantial evidence; People v Ericksen; Sentencing proportionality; Habitual offender; MCL 769.10; Guidelines sentence; People v Steanhouse; People v Boykin; People v Posey (On Remand)

The court held that sufficient evidence supported defendant’s AWIM conviction and that his within-guidelines sentence was proportionate. Defendant was convicted of AWIM and related firearm and child-abuse offenses after the victim was shot in the lower back immediately after exiting her apartment with her two children. His defense was that another person fired the gunshot, but the evidence showed he was the only person in the apartment when the shot was fired. On appeal, the court held that the evidence supported a finding of actual intent to kill because “‘minimal circumstantial evidence is sufficient’” to prove state of mind, and the jury could consider the parties’ toxic relationship, the prior incident in which defendant held a gun to the victim’s head, the argument just before the shooting, the bullet’s trajectory through the door, his effort to end the victim’s 911 call, and his instruction to a child not to tell anyone what happened. The court reasoned that intent “‘to kill may be inferred’” from facts including the use of a deadly weapon, injury to the victim, and attempts to hide evidence. It also held that the 29-year, 8-month minimum sentence for AWIM was reasonable and proportionate because it fell within the guidelines range, the trial court considered the offense and offender, and the circumstances included life-threatening injuries and danger to the children. Affirmed.