Opinion ID: 1801917
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Probation Report Excerpt

Text: A threshold question arises whether the excerpt from the probation officer's report, like the reporter's transcript of the preliminary hearing, is part of the record of the prior conviction. We concluded above that, whether a broad or narrow definition of record of conviction is used, the preliminary hearing transcript is part of the record because the procedural protections afforded the defendant, and the accuracy of a reporter's transcript, make such evidence relatively reliable. Whether the probation officer's report also falls within the more narrow definition of record of conviction presents a closer question. We decline to resolve that question because, as explained below, it is clear the evidence should have been excluded as inadmissible hearsay. (5) As with the preliminary hearing excerpts, the brief excerpt from a probation officer's report in the prior case was multiple hearsay. Aside from the out-of-court nature of the probation officer's statement itself, the report excerpt includes the officer's assertions that certain events reportedly occurred during the prior assault. Narration of reported events is by definition based on the statements of others. Indeed, unless the probation officer was a percipient witness to the assault, all of the narration contained in the excerpt must have been drawn from other people's previous statements. The report fragment does not identify the declarant or declarants from whose statements the probation officer drew his factual summary. There is no evidence the excerpt was based on defendant's own admissions to the officer, so as to fall within the hearsay exception for party admissions. (Evid. Code, § 1220; see People v. Garcia (1989) 216 Cal. App.3d 233, 237 [264 Cal. Rptr. 662] [defendant's admission contained in probation report]; People v. Abarca, supra, 233 Cal. App.3d at p. 1351 [defendant's admission contained in transcript of change-of-plea hearing].) Nor does any other exception to the hearsay rule appear applicable. We conclude the excerpt from the probation officer's report was inadmissible hearsay. (Accord, People v. Williams (1990) 222 Cal. App.3d 911, 917 [272 Cal. Rptr. 212].) Its introduction, however, caused defendant no prejudice, as the report excerpt merely duplicated the evidence regarding personal use contained in the preliminary hearing transcript excerpts, which we have determined were properly admitted under Evidence Code section 1291. The evidentiary error was harmless under the standard stated in People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836 [299 P.2d 243].