PEOPLE v. WOODSDocket No. 158749.
204 Mich. App. 472 (1994)
517 N.W.2d 239
Michigan Court of Appeals.
Submitted March 8, 1994, at Grand Rapids.
Decided April 5, 1994, at 9:05 A.M.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Thomas L. Casey, Solicitor General, Jeffrey C. Middleton, Prosecuting Attorney, and Charles D. Hackney, Assistant Attorney General, for the people. State Appellate Defender (by Anne Yantus), for the defendant on appeal.
Before: SAWYER, P.J., and FITZGERALD and D.A. ROBERSON, JJ.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pleaded nolo contendere to a charge of third-degree criminal sexual conduct, MCL 750.520d(1)(a); MSA 28.788(4)(1)(a), and was sentenced to a prison term of seven to fifteen years. Defendant appeals as of right, claiming that the trial court improperly scored a prior record variable (PRV) and an offense variable (OV) and that his sentence is disproportionate. We affirm.
Defendant's argument that the trial court erred in scoring a prior conviction of operating a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, third offense, as a prior low-severity felony conviction under PRV 2 was addressed and rejected by this Court in People v Eaves,
Offense Variable 2 instructs the trial court to score twenty-five points when the victim suffers bodily injury. The Sentencing Guidelines Manual does not define the term "bodily injury" for purposes of ov 2, and neither this Court nor our Supreme Court has had the occasion to interpret the meaning of bodily injury in the context presented by the facts of this case.
Under MCL 750.520a(j); MSA 28.788(1)(j), "personal injury" is defined as "bodily injury, disfigurement, mental anguish, chronic pain, pregnancy, disease, or loss or impairment of a sexual or reproductive organ." Although defendant correctly observes that "bodily injury" and "pregnancy" are listed separately under this definition, the two are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, "disfigurement" or "loss or impairment of a sexual or reproductive organ" would constitute "bodily injury" within the meaning of ov 2, even though all three constitute "personal injury" under the statute.
Looking to other jurisdictions for guidance, we find the language in People v Sargent,
In this case, the trial court's decision to score the pregnancy and abortion as bodily injury nearly mirrored that of the court in Sargent. Under these circumstances, we conclude that the trial court properly scored twenty-five points under ov 2 for the pregnancy and abortion suffered by the victim as a result of defendant's sexual assault.
Lastly, defendant's sentence, which is within the minimum recommended guidelines' range, is proportionate to the seriousness of the circumstances surrounding the offense and the offender. People v Milbourn,
Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.
- No Cases Found