This post is about the recurring issue of the requirement for a court to make findings of “good cause shown and stated” to preserve its jurisdiction to act on an alleged probation violation after the case has expired. The appellate courts have vacated many probation revocations for a lack of the required findings. The few affirmed cases show how to do things properly. Turns out, it’s not a demanding requirement. The situation comes up all the time. An officer files a timely probation violation report but the case expires before there’s a hearing. The person is no longer on probation, but the violation remains pending—a situation officers refer to as “discontinued” status. Under G.S. 15A-1344(f), a court has jurisdiction to hold the hearing after expiration if all of the following things apply: The State filed a violation report with the clerk before the case expired; The court finds that the probationer violated one or more conditions of probation prior to the expiration of probation; and The court finds for good cause shown and stated that the probation should be extended, modified, or revoked. (There’s a fourth subdivision of G.S. 15A-1344(f), but it’s just a reminder that any extension of probation is limited to the five-year cap in G.S. 15A-1342(a).) It’s the “good cause shown and stated” prong that has been wreaking a bit of probationary havoc. In State v. Morgan, 372 N.C. 609 (2019), the supreme court unanimously held that G.S. 15A-1344(f)(3) means what it says—a court has jurisdiction to act [...]