In People v. Coles, 417 Mich 523, 554; 339 NW2d 440 (1983), rev'd on other grounds People v. Milbourn, 435 Mich 630; 461 NW2d 1 (1990), the Court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the defendant's motion for mistrial where a prosecution witness mentioned the defendant had been involved in other similar drug transactions because the answer was short, was not prejudicial enough to warrant a mistrial, and could have been cured by an instruction. Id. at 554-555. The Court held that sentences were subject to appellate review and implemented a subjective "shocks the conscience" standard as the method for determining whether a sentence constituted a judicial abuse of discretion. The decision to impose this test was deemed justified because, even if the language of the governing constitutional and statutory provisions did not authorize appellate review, neither did it limit it. Coles, 417 Mich. at 534-535.