Background
Bruce McKinzy Spencer was convicted of unlawful imprisonment, two counts of assault with intent to do great bodily harm, and domestic violence after an altercation with his then-girlfriend. The victim testified that Spencer repeatedly grabbed and strangled her in an upstairs bedroom, dragged her away from the door when she tried to escape, and prevented multiple attempts to leave. She ultimately escaped, retrieved a firearm, and forced him to leave the room.
At trial, the prosecution also presented testimony from another former partner about two earlier incidents of domestic violence involving Spencer while he was intoxicated. The jury found Spencer guilty on all counts. The trial court sentenced him to 10 to 30 years for unlawful imprisonment, 10 to 20 years for each assault conviction, and 4 to 10 years for domestic violence.
On appeal, Spencer challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting unlawful imprisonment, admission of the former partner’s testimony, the constitutionality of Michigan’s domestic-violence other-acts statute, and the assessment of 15 points under offense variable 8. He alternatively argued that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to that scoring.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that the victim’s testimony supplied sufficient evidence of unlawful imprisonment because Spencer forcibly restricted her movement by grabbing her neck and pulling her away from the exit, thereby facilitating further assaults.
The court also held that the former partner’s testimony was properly admitted under MCL 768.27b. The earlier incidents similarly involved Spencer assaulting a partner while intoxicated, making the testimony probative of and useful in corroborating the victim’s account. Any danger of unfair prejudice did not substantially outweigh that value, particularly because the jury was instructed not to convict Spencer solely on the basis of other misconduct. The court rejected Spencer’s due-process challenge, concluding that evidentiary safeguards—including MRE 403 review—adequately protect defendants’ rights.
Finally, the court upheld the 15-point score for OV 8. Spencer’s act of dragging the victim across the bedroom moved her farther from an exit and closer to the person attacking her, placing her in greater danger. His repeated prevention of her attempted escapes also held her captive beyond the time necessary to commit unlawful imprisonment. Because the scoring was correct, counsel was not ineffective for declining to object.
Key Takeaways
- Repeatedly grabbing a victim and pulling her away from an exit can establish restraint facilitating another felony and support an unlawful-imprisonment conviction.
- Evidence of prior domestic violence may be admitted under MCL 768.27b when it is relevant and its probative value is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
- Moving a victim farther from safety during an assault, or prolonging captivity by thwarting escape attempts, can support a 15-point OV 8 score.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates that unlawful imprisonment does not require lengthy confinement or removal to a different building. Brief but forcible interference with a victim’s attempt to escape may be enough when it facilitates another felony.
It also confirms that Michigan courts may admit propensity evidence in domestic-violence prosecutions under MCL 768.27b, subject to ordinary safeguards against unfair prejudice, and may score OV 8 based on movement within a room when that movement places the victim in greater danger.