California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Llamas, 67 Cal.App.4th 35, 78 Cal.Rptr.2d 759 (Cal. App. 1998):
6 "Who better than defendant would know whether a supplemental report disclosing his post-conviction behavior would disclose a basis for reducing the term of imprisonment upon resentencing? One might infer from the failure to request a supplemental report or to object to the court's proceeding without one that defendant knows the report will not benefit him. From this one could infer not only that the error is harmless but also that defendant knowingly waived his right to a supplemental probation report. [Citation.] A defendant should not be allowed to stand silent when the court proceeds without a supplemental probation report, gamble that a trial court will impose a lesser term of imprisonment and then urge reversal for the failure to obtain the report without being required to make some showing that he was prejudiced thereby." (People v. Begnaud, supra, 235 Cal.App.3d at p. 1556, fn. 7, 1 Cal.Rptr.2d 507.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.