Court Opinion

ID: 9685548
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 14:46:40.122439+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:07.601961
License: Public Domain

Griffin, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur in that portion of the majority’s opinion that affirms defendant’s conviction. However, I respectfully dissent with respect to the affirmance of defendant’s sentence. I do not agree *301that defendant’s sentence of six to fifteen years for involuntary manslaughter with a motor vehicle is proportionate to the circumstances surrounding the offense and offender. People v Milbourn, 435 Mich 630; 461 NW2d 1 (1990). Accordingly, I would reverse defendant’s sentence and remand for re-sentencing.
After a thorough review of the record,1 I conclude that this is one of the exceptional cases envisioned by Milbourn where a sentence within the guidelines’ range is nonetheless disproportionate to the offense and offender. Id. at 661. I begin by noting that the range given in the sentencing guidelines for the present case is unusually broad. The sentencing guidelines recommend a minimum sentence of anywhere between two and seven years. Defendant’s six-year minimum sentence is therefore at the upper end of the very expansive range. Although I dissented in People v Benson, 200 Mich App 598; 504 NW2d 911 (1993), I agree with the following observation contained in the majority’s opinion:
"[T]he wider the [sentencing guidelines] range, the less reliable the guidelines are as a barometer [of sentence proportionality].” [Id. at 605.]
OFFENDER
Defendant is not a career criminal. On the contrary, she is a working mother and the sole provider for her ten-year-old son. Her prior "record” consists of two tickets for traffic accidents. The presentence report describes defendant’s favorable attributes:_
*302Dorothy Jane Moseller is a 35-year-old native of Muskegon, Michigan. She has many positive factors in her background, including a stable upbringing and the continuing support of family. She possesses a ged and maintains an employment history. This is also the defendant’s first criminal offense.
The prognosis for Ms. Moseller’s treatment both while incarcerated and upon her release to the community is good.
OFFENSE
Defendant stands convicted of involuntary manslaughter for a traffic accident death involving a motor vehicle. Defendant’s conduct was negligent and reckless. Further, defendant admits having consumed five beers before the accident. Her blood alcohol level was 0.15 percent.
Although defendant acted negligently and recklessly, she did not intend to injure or kill. There was no plea bargain. Defendant was convicted of the most serious offense for which she could be charged.
At the time of the accident, defendant’s boyfriend was chasing defendant in another automobile. Defendant’s boyfriend had beaten her in the past and had threatened her with bodily harm immediately before the accident. Defendant legitimately feared for her own safety at the time of the accident. The high-speed chase and resulting automobile accident occurred, in part, because of defendant’s reasonable fear of her boyfriend and her need to flee from him. Although defendant’s motivation does not excuse her conduct, the reasons for her negligence and recklessness must be consid*303ered and weighed in imposing a proportionate sentence.
In the present case, the mitigating circumstances relating to both the offense and offender are not adequately accounted for in the sentencing guidelines. After considering all of the mitigating factors, I conclude that a proportionate sentence for this case would be in the middle or the lower end of the range of the two to seven years given in the sentencing guidelines. I find defendant’s six-year minimum sentence to be disproportionately severe and, therefore, invalid. Milbourn, supra. Accordingly, I would reverse and remand for re-sentencing.

 Once again, our task of review is made more difficult by the failure of the Muskegon County Prosecutor to file a brief or otherwise defend this appeal.