24 results for 'cat:"Probation" AND cat:"Sex Offender"'.
J. Luthy finds that the trial court properly imposed probation conditions on defendant for sex offenses he committed as a minor. He argued that since statute does not require sex offender registration for defendants whose offenses were committed as minors, it was error to impose the same restrictions on him as conditions of probation. But statute does not bar the imposition of sex offender conditions during the limited period of probation. However, the requirement to provide a DNA specimen was error since it is an express component of the requirement to register as a sex offender. Reversed in part.
Court: Utah Court Of Appeals, Judge: Luthy, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 20230194-CA, Categories: Dna, probation, sex Offender
J. Gaertner grants the state's request for a writ of prohibition directing the court not to terminate a probationer's term of probation due to her inability to earn compliance credits because of the nature of her offense. The probationer was convicted of statutory rape, an offense defined as sexual assault, and so was still under a term of probation when the alleged probation violations occurred.
Court: Missouri Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gaertner, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: ED112417, Categories: probation, sex Offender
J. Campbell finds the lower court properly revoked defendant’s probation, but improperly ordered him to serve his original sentence in confinement. Defendant was placed on probation after he pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted aggravated sexual battery. He was required to register as a sex offender and serve concurrent 10-year sentences on supervised probation. Defendant violated the terms of his probation when he was arrested and subsequently pleaded guilty to driving under the influence. As a result of the probation violation, the lower court revoked his probation and ordered him to serve his original 10-year sentence in confinement. Defendant argues the confinement order is excessive and he should have been placed back on supervised probation. The instant court finds the record lacks sufficient information to conduct a proper review, as the lower court failed to reason why it ordered defendant to confinement. The matter is remanded to the lower court for further consideration. Affirmed in part.
Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Campbell, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: W2023-01111-CCA-R3-CD, Categories: probation, Sentencing, sex Offender
J. Northcutt finds the lower court erred in finding defendant in violation of a special condition directing him to complete a sexual offender treatment program. He showed the state’s evidence that he was discharged from the program was mere hearsay. The lower court should enter an amended revocation order, omitting that violation. There must be three violations to revoke probation and impose a prison sentence. Affirmed in part. Reversed in part.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Northcutt, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 2D22-2305, Categories: probation, sex Offender
J. Ray finds that the trial court properly sentenced defendant after he violated probation imposed upon his conviction for lewd and lascivious battery of a victim under 16 years old by having unsupervised contact with a minor. Defendant committed a "substantive violation," and the court was not limited by a six-year sentencing cap. Affirmed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Ray, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 1D2021-3609, Categories: probation, Sentencing, sex Offender
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Lumpkin finds the district court properly revoked defendant's suspended sentence for guilty plea convictions for rape by instrumentation. Probation rules directed defendant to report in Oklahoma, and bore his and his attorney's signatures, establishing he was aware of the requirements. That the probation was to be transferred to Arkansas did not absolve defendant of the requirement he stay in Oklahoma until transfer. Evidence supports revocation for the infractions of failure to report or pay fines, as well. Affirmed.
Court: Oklahoma Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Lumpkin, Filed On: January 25, 2024, Case #: RE-2022-638, Categories: probation, sex Offender, Plea
J. Brown finds the trial court properly found defendant guilty of failure to comply with sex offender registration and reporting requirements. When defendant moved during the Covid-19 pandemic, a sign-in sheet available to those registrants required to report in-person did not contain defendant's signature. Water usage reports at a residence for which defendant applied for service show consistent usage during a period in which no change of address was reported by defendant. All evidence supports the court's finding that defendant failed to report his change of address. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Brown , Filed On: January 17, 2024, Case #: CR-23-329, Categories: Evidence, probation, sex Offender
J. Easter finds the lower court properly revoked a portion of defendant’s probation. Defendant pleaded guilty to sexual battery and received a five-years sentence suspended to probation. Defendant violated the terms of his probation when he violated a no-contact order and was arrested after a domestic disturbance with his ex-girlfriend. The lower court did not err when it partially revoked his probation, ordering him to serve one year in jail then be returned to probation. Affirmed.
Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Easter, Filed On: December 26, 2023, Case #: E2023-00881-CCA-R3-CD, Categories: probation, sex Offender, Restraining Order
J. Panella find that the lower court improperly granted the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole’s request to add three conditions to defendant’s probation, which was imposed after he was charged with sexually abusing children. The trial court lacked a legal basis for entering this order modifying defendant’s probation. Vacated.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: Panella, Filed On: November 14, 2023, Case #: J-A14012-23, Categories: probation, Sentencing, sex Offender
Per curiam, the appeals court finds the county court properly revoked defendant’s deferred adjudication community supervision for burglary of a habitation. Defendant pleaded true to all allegations including failure to appear, failure to submit to urinalysis, and failure to pay fees, and a hearing was conducted on the allegation of online sexual solicitation of a minor. An officer who posed as a 14-year-old girl online testified that he exchanged photos of the purported girl with someone using a phone number associated with defendant, who indicated that he was “DTF.” All evidence supports the revocation and defendant’s counsel has found no arguable points for appeal. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 12-23-00111-CR, Categories: probation, sex Offender, Child Victims
J. McMullen finds the lower court properly revoked defendant’s probation. Defendant pleaded guilty to statutory rape and received a four-year sentence suspended to supervised probation. Defendant violated the terms of his probation when he was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. As a result of the violation, the lower court revoked his probation and ordered him to serve the remainder of his four-year sentence in confinement. The instant court finds no abuse of discretion by the lower court in its order. Affirmed.
Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: McMullen, Filed On: October 9, 2023, Case #: W2022-01433-CCA-R3-CD, Categories: probation, sex Offender, Dui
J. Pickering finds the trial court properly convicted defendant by no-contest plea for attempted lewdness with a child. He was placed on probation which included conditions common to sex-offender probation. It is reasonable to restrict an adult convicted of a sexual offense involving a child from areas where children commonly are found, and the court did not abuse its discretion in applying this condition. But, because defendant’s waiver of appeal did not preclude challenges to probation conditions, certain internet restrictions must be removed from the judgment of conviction. Affirmed in part. Reversed in part and remanded.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Pickering, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 83622, Categories: probation, sex Offender, Child Victims
[Consolidated.] J. Henderson finds defendants' due process rights were violated by delays of two years and eight months, respectively, before their initial duration review hearing could be held, during which time they were forced to abide by conditions of probation even though the state had not met its burden to prove continued probation was necessary. Therefore, the cases will be remanded for new hearings that take into account the due process violations and defendants' eligibility to have probation revoked at the time their initial hearings should have been conducted. Reversed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Henderson, Filed On: September 18, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-39291, Categories: probation, sex Offender, Due Process
J. Kirsch finds that the lower court properly ordered defendant to complete a sex-offender assessment as a condition of supervised release. The presentence investigation report indicated that defendant had been convicted of an offense that involved the sexual assault of a minor. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Kirsch, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: 22-1817, Categories: probation, sex Offender
J. MacIver finds the trial court improperly affirmed defendant’s conviction and sentence to 22 years’ imprisonment for violating two conditions of his probation after he was released from a two-year sentence he served for convictions on child pornography charges. The trial court incorrectly convicted defendant for failing to comply with instructions from his probation officer by finding that wearing a devil costume while working late on Halloween violated the court’s condition prohibiting him from giving kids candy while dressed in a Halloween costume or as Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, as instructions from the probation officer to not wear a costume in general do not have the same effect as the specific probation conditions imposed by the court. Defendant’s conviction is affirmed as to violating his 10 p.m. curfew condition, but since it’s unclear the court would have convicted him based solely on that violation, the matter is remanded for reconsideration. Affirmed in part.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: MacIver, Filed On: August 11, 2023, Case #: 22-1550, Categories: probation, sex Offender
J. Athey finds the lower court properly determined defendant violated the conditions of his suspended sentences by failing to report to his probation officer and failing to complete a recommended psychosexual evaluation. Defendant was convicted of sexual battery, assault and battery, and stalking and was sentenced to 36 months in jail with 30 months suspended for five years. Defendant argued that he believed he was on unsupervised probation and did not have to comply with the court-order evaluation or report to his probation officer. The lower court determined that when he was released to probation, the probation intake officer reviewed the conditions of his suspended sentences with defendant, therefore he knew the terms. Due to his violations, the lower court ordered him to serve six months of active incarceration, and resuspended the 24-month balance of his sentences. Affirmed.
Court: Virginia Court Of Appeals, Judge: Athey, Filed On: August 8, 2023, Case #: 1275-22-4, Categories: probation, Sentencing, sex Offender
J. Connolly affirms the district court's revocation of the defendant's probation and execution of his sentence for first-degree criminal sexual conduct. The state has met its burden of proving that defendant's repeated unsupervised contact with female minors despite a probation condition forbidding such contact, along with violations of conditions forbidding the use of sexually explicit material and requiring him to complete an outpatient sex offender program, warranted revocation of probation.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Connolly, Filed On: July 10, 2023, Case #: A22-1715, Categories: probation, sex Offender
J. van Cleef finds that while sufficient evidence supports the trial court's decision to adjudicate defendant's guilt on counts of sexual assault of a child following the revocation of his community supervision for a failed drug test, he was "harmed by a denial of his right to confront the key witness against him." The case is remanded for a new adjudication hearing. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: van Cleef, Filed On: June 22, 2023, Case #: 06-22-00170-CR, Categories: Confrontation, probation, sex Offender
J. Hixson finds the lower court properly revoked defendant’s probation. Defendant was convicted of aggravated statory rape, simple possession of a Schedule VI controlled substance and theft of property valued at $1,000 or less. He received an effective sentence of four years, suspended to three years and 10 months on supervised probation. Defendant violated the terms of his probation when he tested positive for methamphetamines. The lower court did not abuse its discretion when it revoked defendant’s probation and ordered him to serve the balance of his sentence incarcerated. Affirmed.
Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Hixson, Filed On: May 12, 2023, Case #: E2022-00761-CCA-R3-CD, Categories: probation, Sentencing, sex Offender