Court Opinion

ID: 9533537
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:32:30.967032+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:29:05.048506
License: Public Domain

Justice ERICKSON
dissenting:
I join Chief Justice Vollack’s dissent.
*122The defendant refused to provide information or talk to the probation officer when he was contacted at the county jail. He cannot complain that the presentence report is incomplete because of his failure to talk or provide the probation officer with the information set forth in section 16-ll-102(l)(a), 8A C.R.S. (1994 Supp.).
The right to allocution afforded the defendant with the opportunity to present any mitigating facts or circumstances prior to the imposition of sentence. Defense counsel, by way of allocution, described the defendant’s participation in the offense, the defendant’s remorse, and submitted a letter from the defendant’s father, which described the defendant’s family history and background. The defendant also was permitted to explain how the offense occurred and to advise the court of his remorse and regrets. The victim also appeared at the sentencing hearing and said that the defendant shot him twice and that he was hospitalized for six weeks. The victim underwent open heart surgery to repair the damage caused by the gunshot wound and had extensive surgery on his arm to avoid the necessity of amputation. The seriousness and gravity of the offense supports the sentence imposed.
The defendant’s refusal to talk to the probation officer waived the statutory requirements for the inclusion of family history and background in the presentence report. The letter from the defendant’s father provided the court with the defendant’s family history.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in Chief Justice Vollack’s dissent, I would reverse the court of appeals and affirm the sentence imposed by the trial judge.