Hunt v. State, 327 Ga. App. 692

Hunt’s discretionary probation revocation case arises from an alleged child molestation incident and unrelated technical violations.
Trial court revoked the remainder of Hunt’s probation after finding a potential molestation offense and several technical breaches.
Evidence at the revocation hearing showed Hunt was asleep with a fully clothed child on a couch, with his brother testifying to this scene and recounting a disputed out-of-court statement; no direct proof of wrongdoing was presented.
The State conceded, for purposes of the appeal, that the evidence was insufficient to prove the child molestation offense by a preponderance of the evidence.
The court held that revoking based on the molestation allegation was an abuse of discretion and needed vacatur.
Because the revocation relied on both the felony allegation and technical violations, but the only viable basis under the record was the technical violations—and the court could not revoke more than two years for those—the revocation exceeded statutory limits and must be reheard under OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (c).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for child molestation	Hunt argues evidence is insufficient.	State concedes insufficiency of evidence.	Evidence insufficient; revocation based on molestation invalid.
Authority to revoke beyond two years for technical violations	Hunt contends only technical violations support revocation up to two years.	State argues full revocation permitted by petition.	Two-year limit governs technical violations; excess revocation was error; remand for resentencing.

Parker v. State, 275 Ga. App. 35 (619 SE2d 750) (2005) (revocation standard and noninterference with trial court's discretion)
Dugger v. State, 260 Ga. App. 843, 847 (3) (581 SE2d 655) (2003) (trial court credibility findings govern revocation)
Henley v. State, 317 Ga. App. 776, 779-780 (2) (732 SE2d 836) (2012) (limit on revocation duration for technical violations)