Court Opinion

ID: 9457346
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 20:19:08.229166+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:35:18.780925
License: Public Domain

WINTER, Circuit Judge
(concurring specially):
I concur in the judgment of the Court for these reasons: My own examination of the presentence report and the tran- . script satisfies me that the significant aspects of the report were discussed or alluded to in open court at the trial and at sentencing. They were not controverted by defendant then although the opportunity existed had defendant deemed them untrue; nor is it argued to us now that they were not accurate. There is no reason to believe that the district judge misunderstood them. The remainder of the report, even if untrue, could not have been prejudicial to the defendant.
Otherwise, I persist in the views I expressed in Baker v. United States, 388 F.2d 931 (4 Cir. 1968). See also, Note, The Presentence Report: An Empirical Study Of Its Use In The Federal Criminal Process, 58 Georgetown L.J. 451, 470-475 (1970).