Probation Revocation Need for Confinement

cassiejohnson//December 18, 2015//

Listen to this article

Appellant argued that the District Court abused its discretion in revoking his probation because the need for his confinement did not outweigh the policies favoring probation. The Court of Appeals noted that (1) additional jail time, home monitoring, and treatment appellant identified as “a more appropriate option” had been repeatedly tried, without success; (2) this was appellant’s fourth violation in 17 months while on probation; and (3) only a short time passed between appellant’s release from jail for a previous violation and when he told his agent he was at home, left his home, absconded, and failed to maintain contact with his agent for 35 hours. The Court held that the District Court did not abuse its discretion. Affirmed.

A15-0553 State v. Carter (Stearns County)