Opinion ID: 1728378
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: the failure to order a presentence report.

Text: Section 47-7-9(3)(a) reads as follows: (3)(a) Separate division personnel (hereinafter presentence investigators)  shall be provided to perform investigation for the court as provided in this subsection. Presentence investigators shall conduct presentence investigations on all persons convicted of a felony in any circuit court of the state, prior to sentencing and at the request of the circuit court judge of the court of conviction. The presentence evaluation report shall consist of a complete record of the offender's criminal history, educational level, employment history, psychological condition and such other information as the department or judge may deem necessary. The language of the above quoted statute makes it clear that a presentence report is required only where the circuit judge requests it. In Coleman v. State, 378 So.2d 640 (Miss. 1979), we held that under this statute the presentence investigation is discretionary with the circuit court judge and not mandatory. Also, in a capital case the jury imposes the sentence and both the state and the defendant are entitled to present evidence. Therefore, there is no reason to order such a report. Finally, we note that this claim is procedurally barred because it was not raised on direct appeal. In Re: Evans, supra; Smith v. State, supra.