People v. Triplett , 432 Mich. 568 ( 1989 )

Boyle, J.

I respectfully dissent. Had the defendant claimed that the sentence was arbitrary or an abuse of discretion that shocks the conscience, People v Coles, 417 Mich 523; 339 NW2d 440 (1983), I would agree with today’s result. He did not do so. Nor did the defendant claim that there was any error or mistake in the presentence report or the sentencing information report. Indeed, the defense counsel at sentencing acknowledged on the record that he and the defendant had "read the presentence investigation report and [had] no exceptions thereto.”

The Court of Appeals correctly observed that the failure to articulate is error and trial judges presumptively will respect that observation. Where, however, there is no claim that the error aifected the sentence, i.e., that the sentence was unfair or based on other than accurate information, there is no basis for relief.

I would affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals.

Griffin, J., concurred with Boyle, J.