AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Defendant was accused of violating his probation terms by providing a false name upon arrest and leaving the county without permission on June 2, 2015. The State filed a motion to revoke his probation based on these allegations.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant: Argued that he was not on probation when the alleged violations occurred, citing an amended order of probation that purportedly ended his probation term on April 5, 2015. He also mentioned "good time figuring" sheets, which were not introduced in the lower court, as evidence that he was not on probation at the time of the violations (paras 3-4, 5).
• Appellee: The State's position is not directly detailed in the decision, but it can be inferred that the State argued for the revocation of the Defendant's probation based on violations occurring while the Defendant was still under probation, as per the allegations filed on June 11, 2015 (para 3).

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in revoking the Defendant's probation based on the argument that he was not on probation when the alleged violations occurred.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order revoking the Defendant's probation (para 6).

Reasons

• The Court, with Roderick T. Kennedy, Judge, authoring, and James J. Wechsler and Linda M. Vanzi, Judges, concurring, found the Defendant's argument unpersuasive. The Court noted the existence of an amended second order of probation, signed by the Defendant on April 6, 2015, extending his probation until August 8, 2015. Since the revocation hearing and the order revoking probation occurred on August 4 and 5, 2015, respectively, the Court determined that these events were within the Defendant's probation period as per the amended second order. The Court also declined to consider the "good time figuring" sheets the Defendant referenced in his memorandum in opposition, as these were not introduced in the lower court proceedings (paras 3-5).