Sufficient Evidence of a Probation Violation

Probation violations need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. All that’s required is sufficient evidence to “reasonably satisfy” the judge that a violation occurred. What constitutes competent evidence of a probation violation? And how much proof is enough? There aren’t many appellate cases that really dig into this question. Let’s start with a few things we know. First, the rules of evidence do not apply at a probation violation hearing. G.S. 15A-1345(e). Hearsay is admissible and, as described in this prior post, may play a prominent role in a trial judge’s finding of violation and ultimate decision to revoke. That’s true even when the alleged violation is a new criminal offense that has yet to result in a conviction. State v. Murchison, 367 N.C. 461 (2014). Second, even the fruits of an unlawful search may be admitted at a violation hearing. State v. Lombardo, 306 N.C. 594 (1982) (discussed here). Third, testimony from unconfronted witnesses can support a finding of violation—but only if the trial court makes a finding of good cause for not allowing confrontation. This prior post describes the due process (not Sixth Amendment) confrontation right that applies at a probation violation hearing—including a reminder that a defendant who fails to object to a lack of confrontation at the hearing generally won’t be able to raise the issue for the first time on appeal. With that flexible evidentiary framework in place—and an abuse-of-discretion standard for appellate review, State v. Tennant, 141 N.C. App. 524 (2000)—it’s hard to find a case [...]