(1) No court shall impose sentence for conviction of a felony, other than a capital
offense, without first ordering a presentence investigation after conviction and
giving due consideration to a written report of the investigation. The presentence
investigation report shall not be waived; however, the completion of the presentence
investigation report may be delayed until after sentencing upon the written request
of the defendant if the defendant is in custody.
(2) The report shall be prepared and presented by a probation officer and shall include:
(a) The results of the defendant's risk and needs assessment;
(b) An analysis of the defendant's history of delinquency or criminality, physical
and mental condition, family situation and background, economic status,
education, occupation, and personal habits;
(c) A preliminary calculation of the credit allowed the defendant for time spent in
custody prior to the commencement of a sentence under KRS 532.120; and
(d) Any other matters that the court directs to be included.
(3) Before imposing sentence for a felony conviction, the court may order the defendant
to submit to psychiatric observation and examination for a period not exceeding
sixty (60) days. The defendant may be remanded for this purpose to any available
clinic or mental hospital or the court may appoint a qualified psychiatrist to make
the examination.
(4) If the defendant has been convicted of a sex crime, as defined in KRS 17.500, prior
to determining the sentence or prior to final sentencing for youthful offenders, the
court shall order a comprehensive sex offender presentence evaluation of the
defendant to be conducted by an approved provider, as defined in KRS 17.500, the
Department of Corrections, or the Department of Juvenile Justice if the defendant is
a youthful offender. The comprehensive sex offender presentence evaluation shall
provide to the court a recommendation related to the risk of a repeat offense by the
defendant and the defendant's amenability to treatment and shall be considered by
the court in determining the appropriate sentence. A copy of the comprehensive sex
offender presentence evaluation shall be furnished to the court, the
Commonwealth's attorney, and to counsel for the defendant. If the defendant is
eligible and the court suspends the sentence and places the defendant on probation
or conditional discharge, the provisions of KRS 532.045(3) to (8) shall apply. All
communications relative to the comprehensive sex offender presentence evaluation
and treatment of the sex offender shall fall under the provisions of KRS 197.440
and shall not be made a part of the court record subject to review in appellate
proceedings. The defendant shall pay for any comprehensive sex offender
presentence evaluation or treatment required pursuant to this section up to the
defendant's ability to pay but no more than the actual cost of the comprehensive sex
offender presentence evaluation or treatment.
(5) The presentence investigation report shall identify the counseling treatment,
educational, and rehabilitation needs of the defendant and identify community-
based and correctional-institutional-based programs and resources available to meet
those needs or shall identify the lack of programs and resources to meet those needs.
(6) Before imposing sentence, the court shall advise the defendant or his or her counsel
of the factual contents and conclusions of any presentence investigation or
psychiatric examinations and afford a fair opportunity and a reasonable period of
time, if the defendant so requests, to controvert them. The court shall provide the
defendant's counsel a copy of the presentence investigation report. It shall not be
necessary to disclose the sources of confidential information.
Effective: July 1, 2013
History: Amended 2011 Ky. Acts ch. 2, sec. 37, effective July 1, 2013; and ch. 2, sec.
107, effective June 8, 2011. -- Amended 2009 Ky. Acts ch. 57, sec. 4, effective June
25, 2009. -- Amended 2006 Ky. Acts ch. 182, sec. 44, effective July 12, 2006. --
Amended 2004 Ky. Acts ch. 160, sec. 11, effective July 13, 2004. -- Amended 2000
Ky. Acts ch. 401, sec. 35, effective April 11, 2000. -- Amended 1998 Ky. Acts ch.
606, sec. 75, effective July 15, 1998. -- Amended 1996 Ky. Acts ch. 300, sec. 4,
effective July 15, 1996. -- Amended 1994 Ky. Acts ch. 94, sec. 4, effective July 15,
1994. – Amended 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 427, sec. 3, effective July 14, 1992. -- Amended
1990 Ky. Acts ch. 497, sec. 14, effective July 13, 1990. -- Amended 1976 Ky. Acts
ch. 183, sec. 5, effective June 19, 1976. -- Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 277,
effective January 1, 1975.
Legislative Research Commission Note (7/1/2013). This section was amended by 2011
Ky. Acts ch. 2, secs. 37 and 107, which do not appear to be in conflict and have been
codified together.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
93
cases (
12 in the last 5 years), 1977–2024 · leading case:
Knox v. Commonwealth, 361 S.W.3d 891 (Ky. 2012).
Knox v. Commonwealth, 361 S.W.3d 891 (Ky. 2012).
· cites it 21× “Specifically, he contends that upon entry of his guilty plea, the trial court committed itself to the imposition of a specific sentence, and that upon final sentencing, the trial court failed to comply with KRS 532.050, RCr 11.02, and KRS 533.110(1) by imposing the sentence…”
Commonwealth v. Jeffries, 95 S.W.3d 60 (Ky. 2002).
· cites it 25× “However, Jeffries did not receive the same treatment that an adult offender would have received under KRS 532.050. Jeffries should have been afforded a meaningful opportunity to controvert the evidence against him at his sentencing hearing.”
Hoskins v. Maricle, 150 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2004).
· cites it 4× “2d at 241) ("For guidance to the bench and bar, we set forth the preferred procedure a trial court should follow when accepting a guilty plea that is made pursuant to a plea agreement .... `The sentencing court should merely accept the plea, note the recommendation or agreement…”
Woodall v. Commonwealth, 63 S.W.3d 104 (Ky. 2002).
· cites it 4× “Approximately one week after Woodall pled guilty, the trial judge ordered an evaluation be conducted pursuant to KRS 532.050(4) by the sex offender treatment program.”
McClanahan v. Commonwealth, 308 S.W.3d 694 (Ky. 2010).
· cites it 4× “No sentencing at all should be carried out until KRS 532.050 has been complied with.” Id. at 241 .”
Roe v. Commonwealth, 493 S.W.3d 814 (Ky. 2015).
· cites it 4× “KRS 532.050 provides, in relevant part, that: No court shall impose sentence for conviction of a felony, other than a capital offense, without first ordering a presen-tence investigation after conviction and giving due consideration to- a written *829 report of the investigation.”
Commonwealth v. Reneer, 734 S.W.2d 794 (Ky. 1987).
· cites it 4× “KRS 532.050; KRS 532.040; KRS 532.070. "The report shall be prepared and presented by a probation officer and shall include an analysis of the defendant's history of delinquency or criminality, physical and mental condition, family situation and background, economic status,…”
Buchanan v. Kentucky, 483 U.S. 402 (1987).
· cites it 2× “" Under the Kentucky procedure applicable at the time of petitioner's trial, after receiving a jury verdict and sentence, the trial judge conducted a sentencing hearing where he considered a previously prepared presentence report, see Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050 (1985), whose…”
Brewer v. Commonwealth, 550 S.W.2d 474 (Ky. 1977).
· cites it 6× “Brewer contends that the judgment entered on the jury verdict should be vacated because the trial court failed to follow the presentencing procedures required by KRS 532.050 and KRS 533.010 (Kentucky Penal Code).”
Bard v. Commonwealth, 359 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2011).
· cites it 7× “KRS 532.050 did not expressly require the PSI to contain a preliminary calculation of presentencing custody credit until it was amended in 2011.”
Arnold v. Commonwealth, 573 S.W.2d 344 (Ky. 1978).
· cites it 14× “There is not a shred of evidence that the trial court followed the procedures set out in KRS 532.050 or that he complied with the procedures mandated in Brewer, supra.”
Hall v. Commonwealth, 817 S.W.2d 228 (Ky. 1991).
· cites it 3× “The evidence of prior convictions introduced by the Commonwealth through the testimony of a probation and parole officer in the present case is the same type of information routinely incorporated in presentence investigation reports required under KRS 532.050 *230 to be…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050(1) — 14 cases
Knox v. Commonwealth, 361 S.W.3d 891 (Ky. 2012).
“Specifically, he contends that upon entry of his guilty plea, the trial court committed itself to the imposition of a specific sentence, and that upon final sentencing, the trial court failed to comply with KRS 532.050, RCr 11.02, and KRS 533.110(1) by imposing the sentence…”
McClanahan v. Commonwealth, 308 S.W.3d 694 (Ky. 2010).
“No sentencing at all should be carried out until KRS 532.050 has been complied with.” Id. at 241 .”
Roe v. Commonwealth, 493 S.W.3d 814 (Ky. 2015).
“KRS 532.050 provides, in relevant part, that: No court shall impose sentence for conviction of a felony, other than a capital offense, without first ordering a presen-tence investigation after conviction and giving due consideration to- a written *829 report of the investigation.”
Bard v. Commonwealth, 359 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2011).
“KRS 532.050 did not expressly require the PSI to contain a preliminary calculation of presentencing custody credit until it was amended in 2011.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050(2) — 4 cases
Commonwealth v. Reneer, 734 S.W.2d 794 (Ky. 1987).
“KRS 532.050; KRS 532.040; KRS 532.070. "The report shall be prepared and presented by a probation officer and shall include an analysis of the defendant's history of delinquency or criminality, physical and mental condition, family situation and background, economic status,…”
Hall v. Commonwealth, 817 S.W.2d 228 (Ky. 1991).
“The evidence of prior convictions introduced by the Commonwealth through the testimony of a probation and parole officer in the present case is the same type of information routinely incorporated in presentence investigation reports required under KRS 532.050 *230 to be…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050(2)(a) — 1 case
Bard v. Commonwealth, 359 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2011).
“KRS 532.050 did not expressly require the PSI to contain a preliminary calculation of presentencing custody credit until it was amended in 2011.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050(2)(b) — 3 cases
Bard v. Commonwealth, 359 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2011).
“KRS 532.050 did not expressly require the PSI to contain a preliminary calculation of presentencing custody credit until it was amended in 2011.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050(2)(d) — 2 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050(3) — 3 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050(4) — 7 cases
Woodall v. Commonwealth, 63 S.W.3d 104 (Ky. 2002).
“Approximately one week after Woodall pled guilty, the trial judge ordered an evaluation be conducted pursuant to KRS 532.050(4) by the sex offender treatment program.”
Brewer v. Commonwealth, 550 S.W.2d 474 (Ky. 1977).
“Brewer contends that the judgment entered on the jury verdict should be vacated because the trial court failed to follow the presentencing procedures required by KRS 532.050 and KRS 533.010 (Kentucky Penal Code).”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050(5) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 532.050(6) — 7 cases
Commonwealth v. Jeffries, 95 S.W.3d 60 (Ky. 2002).
“However, Jeffries did not receive the same treatment that an adult offender would have received under KRS 532.050. Jeffries should have been afforded a meaningful opportunity to controvert the evidence against him at his sentencing hearing.”
Roe v. Commonwealth, 493 S.W.3d 814 (Ky. 2015).
“KRS 532.050 provides, in relevant part, that: No court shall impose sentence for conviction of a felony, other than a capital offense, without first ordering a presen-tence investigation after conviction and giving due consideration to- a written *829 report of the investigation.”
Bard v. Commonwealth, 359 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2011).
“KRS 532.050 did not expressly require the PSI to contain a preliminary calculation of presentencing custody credit until it was amended in 2011.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.