People v. Gonzales, 80CA0158

Decision Date19 June 1980
Docket NumberNo. 80CA0158,80CA0158
Citation44 Colo.App. 411,613 P.2d 905
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raymond Robert GONZALES, Defendant-Appellant. . II
CourtColorado Court of Appeals

STERNBERG, Judge.

This is a non-adversary review under C.A.R. 4(d)(3) and (4), pursuant to § 18-1-409.5, C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.). The sentence imposed by the trial court, four years' incarceration plus one year of parole, exceeds the presumptive range of not less than one nor more than two years' imprisonment plus one year of parole established by § 18-1-105(1)(a), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.). We approve the sentence.

Defendant was initially charged with a Class IV felony, but, pursuant to a plea agreement, entered a guilty plea to a Class V felony, criminal attempt to commit sexual assault on a child. By written order the court reviewed the evidence of the crime and found that the charge was based on evidence that he had sexually molested his five-year-old stepdaughter. The child had blood on her legs, and a 1-inch laceration between her vagina and anus. The child explained that, "Daddy has been playing with me."

In that order the court then reviewed defendant's criminal record noting that it includes at least five felony convictions. Included among the felonies were two counts of aggravated robbery in 1967, upon which defendant was sentenced on one count to from five to eight years in the Wyoming State Penitentiary. Also, the court recounted that in 1974 defendant was sentenced to ten to twenty years in the Kansas State Penitentiary for rape. The court then concluded that "these circumstances are unusually aggravated."

The issue presented by this non-adversary review is whether, under the sentencing code, a defendant's criminal record may be considered by a court as "extraordinary mitigating or aggravating circumstances" as that term is used in § 18-1-105(6), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.). If so, a sentence beyond the presumptive range is warranted. If not, the criminal record of a defendant may only be considered in determining the sentence to be imposed within the presumptive range. While the General Assembly has provided no definition of that phrase, our interpretation of the statutes and of the general principles relating to sentencing lead to the conclusion that a defendant's record may be a basis for sentencing beyond the presumptive range.

We deem it significant that the General Assembly has mandated that a sentencing court have before it a written pre-sentence investigation report which "shall include, but not be limited to, information as to defendant's family background, educational history, employment record, and past criminal record . . . ." § 16-11-102(1), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.) (emphasis added). Section 18-1-409.5(1), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.) also mandates that the pre-sentence report must be included in the record sent to this court in our non-adversary review of sentences not within the presumptive range. The General Assembly would not require such a report to be before both the sentencing court and this court if material contained therein relating primarily to the defendant's background, including his "past criminal record," is not to be considered as a factor in imposing a sentence beyond the presumptive range.

Moreover, to reach a contrary conclusion on this issue would be inconsistent with a basic and traditional concept in sentencing that recidivism is a cause for more severe punishment. See People v. Warren, Colo., 612 P.2d 1124 (79CA380, announced June 16, 1980). Here, the defendant had an extensive criminal record. If this identical crime had been committed by a first-time...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • People v. Abbott, 82SA550
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • 13 Noviembre 1984
    ...People v. Phillips, 652 P.2d 575, 578 (Colo.1982); People v. Lopez, 640 P.2d 275, 278 (Colo.App.1982); People v. Gonzales, 44 Colo.App. 411, 412, 613 P.2d 905, 906 (1980). The fact that the defendant injured several persons and showed disregard for their lives and safety is also relevant be......
  • People v. Lucero
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • 17 Octubre 1985
    ...range. People v. Phillips, 652 P.2d 575 (Colo.1982). Here, the trial court reviewed the presentence report, see People v. Gonzales, 44 Colo.App. 411, 613 P.2d 905 (1980), and considered the evidence presented at the preliminary hearings, at trial, evidence presented at the sentencing hearin......
  • People v. Jenkins, s. 82CA0678
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • 14 Julio 1983
    ...a sentence beyond the presumptive range, reveals significant differences between those cases and this one. In People v. Gonzales, 44 Colo.App. 411, 613 P.2d 905 (1980), a sentence beyond the presumptive range was approved for a defendant whose record included at least five felony conviction......
  • Flower v. People
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • 7 Febrero 1983
    ...of extraordinary aggravating circumstances. The defendant urges us to adopt the reasoning of the dissent in People v. Gonzales, 44 Colo.App. 411, 613 P.2d 905 (1980). We respectfully decline and affirm our decision in People v. Phillips, 652 P.2d 575 (Colo.1982). We "To accept the reasoning......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Colorado Felony Sentencing
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Lawyer No. 11-6, June 1982
    • Invalid date
    ...(1981). 13. C.R.S. 1973, § 18-1-105(7); People v. Watkins, ___ Colo. ___, 613 P.2d 633 (1980). 14. People v. Gonzales, ___ Colo.App. ___, 613 P.2d 905 (1980); People v. Hamling, ___ Colo.App. ___, 634 P.2d 1023 (1981); People v. Cantwell, ___ Colo.App. ___, 636 P.2d 1331 (1981) (cert. grant......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT