People v. Moss

Opinion

KING, J.

In this case we hold that a reporter’s transcript of a court’s oral statement of reasons for revoking probation satisfies the due process requirement of a written statement as to the evidence relied on and the reasons for revocation. Gregory Darnell Moss appeals from a judgment revoking probation. We affirm.

An affidavit seeking revocation of Moss’s probation (which he had received for two prior drug offenses) specified two “counts” in support of revocation. The first was the failure to surrender for service of a jail sentence, and the second was a theft from a department store. At the revocation hearing the court said it found no violation as to the first count but, “As to count II, it’s clear to this court that the violation has occurred and I will sustain the affidavit. . . .” The court revoked probation and reinstated a suspended three-year prison sentence.

A probationer for whom revocation of probation is sought is entitled to certain procedural safeguards, including “written notice of the claimed violations of his probation; disclosure of the evidence against him; an opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documentary evidence; a neutral hearing body;

and a written statement by the factfinder as to the evidence relied on and the reasons for revoking probation.

[Citation.]”

(Black

v.

Romano

(1985) 471 U.S. 606, 612 [85 L.Ed.2d 636, 643, 105 S.Ct. 2254], italics added, citing

Gagnon

v.

Scarpelli

(1973) 411 U.S. 778, 786 [36 L.Ed.2d 656, 664, 93 S.Ct. 1756] and

Morrissey

v.

Brewer

(1972) 408 U.S. 471, 489 [33 L.Ed.2d 484, 499, 92 S.Ct. 2593].) Moss

[534]