Opinion ID: 1201769
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Trial Court's Review of Probation Report

Text: (32) Before ruling on the automatic motion to modify penalty, the trial court announced that it had read and considered the probation report. Defendant argues that this was improper because the trial court is to consider only the evidence before the jury when ruling on the motion. (See People v. Lewis, supra, 50 Cal.3d 262, 287.) We conclude that any error was harmless. The trial court did not refer to any material in the probation report when giving its reasons for denying the modification motion. Therefore, we must assume that the court was not improperly influenced by the report. ( People v. Raley (1992) 2 Cal.4th 870, 922-923 [8 Cal. Rptr.2d 678, 830 P.2d 712]; People v. Fauber (1992) 2 Cal.4th 792, 866-867 [9 Cal. Rptr.2d 24, 831 P.2d 249].)