 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Southern v. State9/12/2001
on were offered to prove that the ppellant had served a term of confinement in a correctional institution as required under the statute."
We hold that the court was entitled to rely on the presentence investigation report to invoke section 643B(d). This precise issue was addressed in Sutton v. State, 128 Md. App. 308 (1999). In Sutton, the State relied on a presentence report to sustain its burden to prove that Sutton was eligible for enhanced punishment under Article 27, section 286(c)(1). We held that the presentence report was sufficient to establish the State's burden. " presentence investigation report given to the defendant's attorney at the hearing is `competent evidence' sufficient to prove `the factual predicate in order to impose enhanced punishment,' provided counsel does not object to the accuracy of the record." Id. at 328-29.
In the instant case, appellant did not object to the contents of the presentence investigation report; in fact, he admitted that the report was accurate. On appeal, he does not contest the report's validity; rather, he contends it is not sufficient in and of itself to sustain the State's burden. We disagree, and hold that Sutton is controlling. Therefore, we shall affirm appellant's sentence under section 643B(d).
CASE REMANDED WITHOUT AFFIRMANCE OR REVERSAL TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING A SUPPRESSION HEARING CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION. THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION REMAINS IN EFFECT PENDING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. COSTS TO BE PAID ONE-HALF BY APPELLANT AND ONE-HALF BY APPELLEE.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Maryland Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|