Court Opinion

ID: 9543532
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:46:18.685343+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:10:32.623217
License: Public Domain

Judge JONES
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur with Parts I and III of the opinion but respectfully dissent to Part II. I write separately to note that I believe defendant here was not accorded her right to be heard on the issues presented in the Victim Impact Statement, including as to restitution.
It is uncontroverted that the district attorney was given the victim impact statement the night before the sentencing and that defense counsel and defendant only received it at the sentencing hearing.
A defendant is entitled to receive the impact statement 72 hours or more prior to his or her sentencing. People v. Johnson, 780 P.2d 504 (Colo.1989). When the court and its officers fail to meet this reasonable deadline, I believe an affirmative duty devolves upon the court to fix the time for sentencing such that the defendant may review the impact statement and truly participate in a meaningful way in the sentencing hearing, including as to restitution. See People v. Powell, 748 P.2d 1355 (Colo.App.1987).
Because the court failed to do so here, I believe defendant was denied the opportunity to be heard. Accordingly, I would affirm the judgment but vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing after a full hearing.