David J. Taylor v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
02A05-1701-CR-99
| Ind. Ct. App. | Jul 7, 2017Background
- David J. Taylor pled guilty to Level 6 felony intimidation and received 1 year and 183 days, with one year suspended to probation; the executed portion was to be served on home detention.
- Taylor tested positive for cocaine on three drug screens in May 2016; the State filed petitions to revoke home detention and probation, which were initially dismissed with additional probation conditions imposed.
- The court ordered Taylor to reside at a halfway house (Countryside Ranch) under a zero-tolerance policy and later to complete the Road to Recovery program after a second revocation hearing.
- Taylor failed to report to Countryside Ranch, did not attend Road to Recovery for an intake (and did not notify probation of financial inability), and missed probation officer appointments despite notice; the State filed a third petition to revoke.
- The trial court found multiple probation violations and revoked probation, ordering Taylor to serve his previously suspended one-year sentence; Taylor appealed, arguing insufficiency of evidence and a due process violation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Taylor) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to revoke probation | Evidence (positive drug tests, failure to reside at halfway house, missed appointments) shows probation conditions were violated | Taylor claims failures (e.g., not attending Road to Recovery) were excused by inability to pay and lack of notice for rescheduled appointment | Court: Sufficient evidence of multiple violations; revocation upheld |
| Financial inability as defense to failure to attend program | Attendance was a valid condition; no evidence Taylor informed court or PO of financial inability | Taylor argues Ic. Code § 35-38-2-3(g) prohibits revocation for failure to comply with financial-condition unless reckless/knowing/intentional nonpayment | Court: Taylor never notified court/PO of financial burden; argument forfeited; revocation valid |
| Notice of rescheduled probation appointment | State notes notice letters were sent (including to Road to Recovery had he attended) | Taylor contends he lacked notice of the rescheduled October 6 appointment | Court: He missed an earlier appointment without excuse and would have received notice had he attended program; no relief |
| Due process — opportunity to present evidence | State asserts Taylor was given hearings and opportunities to be heard; he admitted failures at hearing | Taylor asserts incarceration prevented obtaining phone records that would show contact with PO | Court: Because Taylor admitted failing to contact PO, the phone records were unnecessary; procedural due process requirements were satisfied |
Key Cases Cited
- Heaton v. State, 984 N.E.2d 614 (Ind. 2013) (standard for reviewing probation revocation and appellate scope of review)
- Woods v. State, 892 N.E.2d 637 (Ind. 2008) (volition relevant to disposition; due process requires opportunity to explain final chance)
- Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972) (due process protections required in parole/probation revocation proceedings)
- Terrell v. State, 886 N.E.2d 98 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (when probationer admits violation, full evidentiary hearing on factual guilt is unnecessary)
- Wann v. State, 997 N.E.2d 1103 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (enumeration of due process rights in revocation proceedings)