Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports·Decided March 20, 1991·No. 90-802·Published

Opinion

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

State of California

DANIEL E. LUNGREN

Attorney General

______________________________________

OPINION : : No. 90-802 of : : MARCH 20, 1991 DANIEL E. LUNGREN : Attorney General : :

ANTHONY S. DaVIGO :

Deputy Attorney General :

: ______________________________________________________________________________

THE HONORABLE MICHAEL D. BRADBURY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF VENTURA COUNTY, has requested an opinion on the following questions:

1. May the district attorney submit a statement in aggravation at the sentencing phase of a misdemeanor case?

2. May a statement in aggravation contain references to matters outside the record of the case and contain evidence other than by way of testimony?

CONCLUSION

1. At the discretion of the trial court, the district attorney may submit a statement in aggravation at the sentencing phase of a misdemeanor case, provided that the statement consists of information which could have been included in a probation report.

2. Such a statement in aggravation may contain references to matters outside the record of the case and may contain evidence other than by way of testimony.

ANALYSIS

In connection with the establishment in 1976 of determinate sentencing for persons convicted of a felony, Penal Code section 11701 was enacted, providing in subdivision (b) as follows:

1 All section references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.

1. 90-802

"When a judgment of imprisonment is to be imposed and the statute specifies three possible terms, the court shall order imposition of the middle term, unless there are circumstances in aggravation or mitigation of the crime. At least four days prior to the time set for imposition of judgment, either party or the victim, or the family of the victim if the victim is deceased, may submit a statement in aggravation or mitigation to dispute facts in the record or the probation officer's report, or to present additional facts. In determining whether there are circumstances that justify imposition of the upper or lower term, the court may consider the record in the case, the probation officer's report, other reports including reports received pursuant to Section 1203.03 and statements in aggravation or mitigation submitted by the prosecution, the defendant, or the victim, or the family of the victim if the victims is deceased, and any further evidence introduced at the sentencing hearing. The court shall set forth on the record the facts and reasons for imposing the upper or lower term. . . ." (Emphases added.)

We are now asked to consider whether the prosecution may submit such a statement in aggravation2 in a misdemeanor case, and if so, whether the statement is limited by law to matters contained within the record of the case, and whether such matters may be presented only by testimony.

No express statutory authority, such as that provided in section 1170 pertaining to felonies, appears with respect to misdemeanors. As noted in that section, the court must exercise its option between three possible terms and is required to recite its reasons when electing the upper or lower term. (§ 1170, subds. (b) and (c).) No similar procedure is prescribed in misdemeanor

2 Rule 437 of the California Rules of Court prescribes the content of a Statement in Aggravation in felony cases:

". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

"(c) A statement in aggravation or mitigation shall include: "(1) A summary of facts which the party relies upon as circumstances in aggravation or mitigation justifying imposition of the upper or lower term.

"(2) Notice of intention to dispute facts or offer evidence in aggravation or mitigation at the sentencing hearing. The statement shall generally describe the evidence to be offered, including a description of any documents and the name and expected substance of the testimony of any witnesses. No evidence in aggravation or mitigation may be introduced at the sentencing hearing unless it was described in the statement, or unless its admission is permitted by the sentencing judge in the interests of justice.

"(d) Assertions of fact in a statement in aggravation or mitigation shall be disregarded unless they are supported by the record in the case, the probation officer's report or other reports properly filed in the case, or other competent evidence."

2. 90-802

cases,3 and the court is not compelled to recite those aggravating or mitigating circumstances which it may have considered.4

With respect to misdemeanors, subdivision (d) of section 1203 provides:

"In every case in which a person is convicted of a misdemeanor, the court may either refer the matter to the probation officer for an investigation and a report or summarily pronounce a conditional sentence. If such a case is not referred to the probation officer, in sentencing the person, the court may consider any information concerning the person which could have been included in a probation report. The court shall inform the person of the information to be considered and permit him or her to answer or controvert such information. For this purpose, upon the request of the person, the court shall grant a continuance before the judgment is pronounced."5

Under the foregoing section, a court may, but need not, refer the matter to the probation officer for investigation and report. A court "may consider any information concerning the person which could have been included in a probation report," when a probation report is not prepared. We discern nothing in the latter provision which prohibits the court from allowing the prosecution to submit a statement in aggravation, provided that such information could have been included in a probation report.6 Moreover, as we shall demonstrate, the probation report may contain written statements from prosecuting attorneys. As long as the defendant is given an opportunity to answer the statement, we do not distinguish between such a statement whether contained in a probation report, filed directly with the court by the prosecuting attorney, or made in open court at the hearing.

Consequently, in answer to the first question, the trial court has discretion to allow the district attorney to submit a statement in aggravation in a misdemeanor case if the statement consists of information which could have been included in a probation report.7 If the court elects

3 Section 19 provides generally:

"Except in cases where a different punishment is prescribed by any law of this state, every offense declared to be a misdemeanor is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both." 4 Inasmuch as the express authorization for submission by the prosecution of a statement in aggravation was enacted as part of the determinate sentencing procedure in felony cases (Stats. 1976, ch. 1139 § 273), the lack of a similar specific reference in misdemeanor cases is understandable. 5 A "conditional sentence" is "the suspension of the imposition or execution of a sentence and the order of conditional and revocable release in the community subject to the conditions established by the court without the supervision of the probation officer." (§ 1203, subd. (a).) 6 Subdivision (d) of section 1203 constitutes an express grant of authority to the court to "consider any information . . ." if it chooses to "summarily pronounce a conditional sentence." We do not view such language as a limitation placed upon the court where a probation report is ordered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion, (Cal. 1991).

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion (Untitled California Attorney General Opinion) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gardner v. Florida
430 U.S. 349 (Supreme Court, 1977)
People v. Neal
218 P.2d 556 (California Court of Appeal, 1950)
People v. Giles
161 P.2d 623 (California Court of Appeal, 1945)
People v. Cheatham
591 P.2d 1237 (California Supreme Court, 1979)
People v. Arbuckle
587 P.2d 220 (California Supreme Court, 1978)
In Re Calhoun
549 P.2d 1235 (California Supreme Court, 1976)
In Re Cortez
490 P.2d 819 (California Supreme Court, 1971)
People v. Zikorus
150 Cal. App. 3d 324 (California Court of Appeal, 1983)
People v. Hernandez
160 Cal. App. 3d 725 (California Court of Appeal, 1984)
People v. Betterton
93 Cal. App. 3d 406 (California Court of Appeal, 1979)
People v. Valdivia
182 Cal. App. 2d 145 (California Court of Appeal, 1960)