A sentencing judge in a judge-alone trial is not constrained by the findings of fact made in the verdict judgment and may take into account evidence admitted at trial (even if not relied upon for the verdict) for sentencing purposes, provided the finding is consistent with the verdict and proved beyond reasonable doubt. Evidence admitted without objection at trial is not 'excluded' merely because the trial judge indicated she would not have regard to it in determining guilt. On incompetence of counsel, a rational forensic explanation for counsel's approach — including ethical constraints on raising unfounded allegations of serious impropriety — will defeat such a ground even where the accused's preferred case theory was not advanced.
The full text is available to signed-in members.