People of Michigan v. Damian Antony Willingham, 349919

May 6, 2018 altercation outside Champion’s Sports Grill: defendant and codefendant Ricky Richett attacked Thomas and Michael Beaudrie; Michael later died from blunt-force trauma caused by the assault.
Multiple witnesses testified defendant punched and, after Thomas fell, continued to punch and kick Thomas while Thomas curled in a fetal position; Thomas sustained significant head and facial injuries and later sought psychiatric care.
Defendant and Richett were jointly tried; jury convicted Richett of second-degree murder and AWIGBH, and convicted defendant of assault with intent to do great bodily harm (AWIGBH) as to Thomas; defendant acquitted of second-degree murder.
At sentencing defendant’s guidelines minimum was 19–30 months; trial court sentenced him to 30 months minimum (30 months–10 years) after rejecting a request for the low end (19 months).
Post-appeal motion: defendant argued his presentence investigation report (PSIR) wrongly stated he was ineligible for Special Alternative Incarceration (SAI) boot camp and sought correction and boot-camp placement; trial court declined to resolve eligibility, finding it would have imposed the same sentence regardless.
This Court affirmed the conviction and sentence but remanded solely to strike the PSIR line about SAI eligibility (trial court had treated that information as irrelevant and not relied on it).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence for AWIGBH	Witness testimony established defendant assaulted Thomas and continued to beat him after he was down; severity of injuries and flight support intent to inflict great bodily harm	Identification and some testimony suggest possible self-defense or uncertainty about who started the fight	Affirmed — evidence sufficient to prove assault and specific intent to inflict great bodily harm beyond a reasonable doubt
Accuracy of PSIR re: SAI eligibility	PSIR likely correct because DOC excludes candidates with guidelines above 0–12 months; sentencing court did not rely on the PSIR line	PSIR inaccurately states he was ineligible for SAI; requests correction and resentencing to permit SAI consideration	Remanded only to strike the PSIR statement about SAI ineligibility; no resentencing because the court did not rely on that information
Whether sentencing to prison instead of SAI was an abuse of discretion/proportionality	Within-guidelines sentence is presumptively proportionate; no unusual circumstances shown to rebut presumption	Argues SAI boot camp would be more appropriate and rehabilitative; contends sentence disproportionate	Affirmed — within-guidelines sentence upheld; defendant failed to show unusual circumstances rendering it disproportionate

People v Stevens, 306 Mich App 620 (2014) (AWIGBH is a specific-intent crime)
People v Blevins, 314 Mich App 339 (2016) (elements of AWIGBH explained)
People v Nowack, 462 Mich 392 (2000) (prosecution not required to negate every reasonable theory consistent with innocence)
People v Waclawski, 286 Mich App 634 (2009) (sentencing court must resolve challenges to PSIR accuracy and correct or strike inaccuracies)
People v Spanke, 254 Mich App 642 (2003) (remand is appropriate to correct inaccurate PSIR entries)
People v Milbourn, 435 Mich 630 (1990) (sentencing proportionality principle)
People v Steanhouse, 500 Mich 453 (2017) (standard of review and approach for proportionality and abuse-of-discretion in sentencing)