Absconding from Probation: Supreme Court Affirms Krider

In State v. Krider, __ N.C. App. __, 810 S.E.2d 828 (2018) (discussed here), a divided court of appeals vacated the defendant’s probation revocation based on absconding. Last week, the supreme court affirmed the court of appeals. Today’s post considers what Krider tells us about absconding—and what constitutes sufficient proof of any probation violation. In Krider, the defendant was on felony probation for cocaine possession. About six months into Mr. Krider’s  yearlong probation period, his probation officer visited his listed address. The defendant wasn’t there. A week later, the officer filed a violation report alleging that Krider had absconded. At the ensuing violation hearing, the probation officer testified that when he visited the house, an “elderly black female” told him that the defendant didn’t live there. The trial judge found the defendant absconded and revoked probation. The court of appeals vacated the revocation, concluding that there was insufficient evidence that Mr. Krider absconded. The court flagged several issues as important in reaching that conclusion. First, the State didn’t put on any evidence of the identity of the woman who told the officer that the defendant didn’t live at the house—or whether she even lived there herself. Second, the officer did not make any attempt to revisit the residence or otherwise verify the defendant’s whereabouts. Third, there was no evidence that the defendant was aware of the officer’s attempt to find him, and thus no indication that he was willfully making his whereabouts unknown. And fourth, the State failed to refute the [...]