 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hutchison v. State12/13/2000
ported back to Fairbanks and an examination was ordered by the court, I would estimate that we wouldn't have the written results for a month to six weeks. ... Not that I could make any estimate as to whether those results would be even informative, let alone dictate a particular course of therapy as being included ... in a reasonable condition of probation.
Judge Jeffery responded that the defense had two options: to delay the sentencing hearing, or to go forward "with the idea that we've still got a [180-day] window to change things" under Criminal Rule 35(b) if the results of the neuropsychiatric examination showed that Hutchison's sentence should be revisited. When the prosecutor declared that the State would oppose any continuance of the sentencing hearing, Hutchison's attorney replied, " e're not asking for one". The defense attorney then conceded that he did not know whether it would be worthwhile to wait for Hutchison's psychiatric assessment:
Defense Attorney: We are prepared to go ahead with sentencing this afternoon, at your discretion. It's really a question of whether you feel that the additional information to be developed through a neuropsychiatric examination, and subsequent reassessment by the treatment professionals, is going to provide the court with meaningful information for sentencing purposes. That requires more crystal ball [than] I possess.
The defense attorney agreed with Judge Jeffery that "obviously, we could petition for modification of the sentence if the results of future examinations showed that something you had imposed clearly inappropriate." After hearing the defense attorney's position, Judge Jeffery announced that the sentencing hearing would go forward.
The defense attorney's remarks during this colloquy are pertinent to Hutchison's claim that Judge Jeffery should have placed more weight on Hutchison's prospects for rehabilitation. We note, in particular, the defense attorney's statement that the alcohol counselors could not, or were not willing to, assess Hutchison's prospects for rehabilitation without a further neuropsychiatric examination, and the defense attorney's further statement that he did not know whether the contemplated examination would actually shed any light on this issue. Given these statements, Judge Jeffery could reasonably conclude that Hutchison's prospects for rehabilitation were uncertain and that Hutchison's sentence should be fashioned accordingly.
(The record does not indicate whether a further neuropsychiatric examination was ever conducted. But, in any case, Hutchison never asked Judge Jeffery to modify his sentence under Criminal Rule 35(b).)
We conclude that Hutchison's sentence is not clearly mistaken. The sentencing decision of the superior court is therefore AFFIRMED.
Page 1 2 Alaska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|