Court Opinion

ID: 9793623
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:50:44.110501+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:06:14.673948
License: Public Domain

WILKINS, Justice
(concurring in result):
I concur in result and add a brief comment on one point concerning the matter of disclosing pre-sentence reports to the defendant, which was the subject of a split decision by this Court in Reddish v. Smith, Utah, 576 P.2d 859, in which Mr. Justice Maughan and I each wrote dissenting opinions. For reasons noted in my dissenting opinion in Reddish, I believe — at minimum — that if a pre-sentence report is obtained and information therein relied upon by the sentencing judge, then the defendant should be given the opportunity to rebut the same. In this case, however, the defendant’s request for inspection of the report was not made prior to sentencing but after and no disclosures were made by the District Judge that he relied upon the contents of the report. Therefore, I do not believe that the facts of this case fall within the rationale announced in my dissenting opinion in Reddish.
MAUGHAN, J., concurs in the concurring opinion of WILKINS, J.