Sufficiency of the evidence; Carjacking; MCL 750.529a; Intent; Sentencing; Proportionality & reasonableness; People v Posey; Two-thirds rule under People v Tanner; Judgment of sentence (JOS)

The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support defendant’s carjacking conviction and that he was not entitled to resentencing. However, based on the two-thirds rule under Tanner, it remanded for entry of an amended JOS reducing his minimum sentence for unlawful imprisonment to 120 months. It affirmed in all other respects. She was convicted of carjacking and unlawful imprisonment. She was sentenced to concurrent sentences of 135 months to 30 years for carjacking and 135 months to 15 years for unlawful imprisonment. Defendant first challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her carjacking conviction, claiming “that the evidence was insufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that she intended to permanently deprive” victim-R of her vehicle. After R “refused to give defendant a ride for the second time, defendant punched [R], attempted to remove [R] from the truck, and demanded that [R] get out of the vehicle.” Defendant could not remove R because S was holding R’s hair from inside the truck. Further, “once they arrived at defendant’s intended destination, defendant took the key and would not give it back. [R] only regained possession of her vehicle after defendant was physically and violently forced to surrender possession of the key by various third parties.” Thus, the court concluded the “evidence that defendant intended to retain [Rs] vehicle without the purpose to return it within a reasonable time, satisfying the specific intent required to support a conviction under MCL 750.529a.”