Court Opinion

ID: 9738852
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:04:25.020472+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:08.795537
License: Public Domain

ADDENDUM (ON REHEARING)
Sawyer P.J.
Following the release of this opinion to the parties, plaintiff moved for rehearing, seeking a clarification of our original opinion. Although our holding is unaffected, we agree that certain language in the opinion can be read to produce in other cases a result that we did not intend.
Specifically, in the opinion, ante at 711, we state "for a drunken-driving offense to constitute a misdemeanor in the drug-crime group under the sentencing guidelines, it must be included on the drug-crime list.” Later, we state that "[b]ecause drunken driving is not on the drug-crime list, or any other crime list for that matter, it is not scorable as a prior misdemeanor conviction.” Read literally, this would mean that virtually no misdemeanors would be scorable because the crime list only contains crimes for which an sir is to be prepared upon conviction, which are almost all felonies.1 As defendant points out in his answer to plaintiffs motion for rehearing, this was not our *714intention, nor did defendant advocate such a holding. Indeed, such a holding would be contrary to the fact that the sentencing guidelines specifically provide for the scoring of misdemeanors.
Rather, the first of the above-quoted sentences should have read "for a drunken-driving offense to constitute a misdemeanor in the drug-crime group under the sentencing guidelines, it must be related to a crime included on the drug-crime list” and the second sentence should have read "[b]ecause drunken driving is not related to a crime on the drug-crime list, or any other crime list for that matter, it is not scorable as a prior misdemeanor conviction.” We regret any confusion our inartful drafting in the original opinion may have caused.
The point to be made is that, to be scorable, a misdemeanor must bear a relationship to the crimes on one of the crime lists. For example, simple assault, MCL 750.81; MSA 28.276, would be properly scored as a prior misdemeanor because it is related to the various assaultive offenses that are on the assault crime list. Misdemeanor assault is of the same type and character, except for severity, as various felony assault offenses on the crime list. Indeed, misdemeanor assault is included in the same chapter of the Penal Code as many of the felony assault offenses included on the assault crime list.2
Drunken driving bears no relationship to the drug offenses. They are punishable under separate statutes, and the former relates to traffic safety while the latter relates to public health. They simply are not of the same type or character. Indeed, felony drunken driving is not on the drug-crime list, or any other crime list.3
*715Accordingly, we reaffirm our original conclusion, as clarified herein.4

 The crime lists do contain some misdemeanors, such as the two-year offense of fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct. MCL 750.520e; MSA 28.788(5).

 Lest there be further confusion, this is merely a factor to be considered rather than a requirement to be met.

 Again, this is only a factor to be considered and not a test to be *715met. For example, felony retail fraud, MCL 750.356c; MSA 28.588(3), is not on a crime list, yet misdemeanor retail fraud is likely scorable as a prior misdemeanor because it is related to the larceny crime group and is of the same type and character as larceny.

 Judge Neff would grant rehearing but stands by her partially concurring and partially dissenting opinion.