Wolford v. People, 24674
| Decision Date | 01 May 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 24674,24674 |
| Citation | 178 Colo. 203,496 P.2d 1011 |
| Parties | Rodney WOLFORD, Plaintiff in Error, v. The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Peter H. Ney, Englewood, for plaintiff in error.
Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., John P. Moore, Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard G. McManus, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for defendant in error.
Rodney Wolford was convicted of the crime of conspiracy to possess narcotic drugs in violation of C.R.S. 1963, 40--7--35. He was denied probation and was sentenced to the state penitentiary. His motion under Crim.P. 35 to vacate and correct his sentence was denied and he brings error to review the order of denial. We affirm.
On November 19, 1967, Wolford was arrested at Stapleton International Airport while he was meeting two friends who were apprehended in the act of transporting a substantial quantity of hashish into Colorado from California. Thereafter, on December 21, 1967, Wolford and one Douglas Redmond were jointly charged with the crimes of possession of narcotic drugs and conspiracy to possess narcotic drugs in the Denver District Court.
At trial, at the conclusion of the People's evidence, Wolford's motion to dismiss the count of possession of narcotics was granted. He thereupon withdrew his plea of not guilty and entered a plea of guilty to the conspiracy count. He applied for probation. An extensive report of the probation department was submitted for the court's consideration.
The probation report outlined Wolford's activities in the 'drug community.' It stated in part:
'Mr. Wolford when questioned regarding his participation in the present case again reiterated essentially the same information that appears on the front sheet of the application for probation and readily acknowledged his part as expressed in the official version of the police offense submitted to the District Attorney. He relates he has been dealing with narcotics, LSD, marijuana, etc. since approximately December of 1966 and that approximately one month later he started selling various drugs. He states that he himself has experienced several 'bad trips' with LSD such as 'disorganization in perception' and readily acknowledges that he has 'turned on' numerous people in the Denver area, mostly friends of his. Wolford maintains that he has discontinued his involvement with narcotics and has made a serious attempt to better himself, as indicated by his 3.33 (4.0 equals 'A') average at Metropolitan State College after completing 18 hours.
* * *
* * *
'On June 6, 1967, Wolford was living in the Capitol Hill area with Steve Woody and was selling LSD and marijuana to the hippie element.
* * *
* * *
The report further indicated Wolford had been convicted in the United States District Court of the illegal sale of LSD and was sentenced to seven months in jail, which conviction he had appealed. Further, Wolford had been charged on March 28, 1967, in the Denver District Court with the illegal possession of marijuana. (This latter charge was dismissed upon Wolford's guilty plea to conspiracy.) Additionally, the report contained detailed information concerning Wolford's social history, including his home background, education, employment record, financial condition, together with character references, and, finally, a recommendation that probation be denied.
At the probation hearing, Wolford was represented by counsel. A copy of the probation report was furnished to Wolford and his counsel prior to the hearing. Counsel made an extensive plea in behalf of his client and having opportunity to refute any statement in the report, did not do so. Wolford's mother also spoke on his behalf. In the course of the colloquy, the court stated:
Wolford's right of allocution was honored and the court then sentenced him to not less than five nor more than ten years in the state penitentiary.
The motion under ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Butcher
...information is inaccurate or untrue, the trial court is entitled to rely upon the report or statement as submitted. Wolford v. People , 178 Colo. 203, 496 P.2d 1011 (1972). Additionally, a defendant waives her objection to the restitution amount by failing to go forward with evidence which ......
-
People v. Bruebaker, 26233
...because of the substantial difference between the sentencing hearing and the trial itself. People v. Duran, supra; Wolford v. People, 178 Colo. 203, 496 P.2d 1011 (1972); Holdren v. People, 168 Colo. 474, 452 P.2d 28 (1969); Gregg v. United States, 394 U.S. 489, 89 S.Ct. 1134, 22 L.Ed.2d 44......
-
People v. Padilla
...presented in accordance with the due process procedures required in a guilt trial on the merits of the case. Wolford v. People, 178 Colo. 203, 208, 496 P.2d 1011, 1013 (1972); see also CRE 1101(d)(3) (rules of evidence are inapplicable in sentencing proceedings); cf. Williams, 337 U.S. at 2......
-
People v. Tuffo
...892-95. Courts resolving sentencing matters may rely on uncontroverted facts set forth in a presentence report. Wolford v. People, 178 Colo. 203, 208, 496 P.2d 1011, 1013 (1972); People v. Powell, 748 P.2d 1355, 1358 (Colo. App.1987). And even where a defendant challenges facts in a present......