Jenkins v. State
956 N.E.2d 146
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Jenkins pleaded guilty to multiple offenses on May 21, 2002; sentenced February 25, 2004 to 20 years with 6 executed and 14 suspended to probation.
- Between 2006 and 2008, four probation violation petitions were sustained after Jenkins admitted to violations.
- On March 3, 2010 (amended December 6, 2010), the State alleged four additional probation violations: breaking laws, failing to timely report, failing to pay court costs, and failing to pay probation fees.
- At the evidentiary hearing, Jenkins admitted failing to timely report and failing to pay costs and fees; the court found those violations but did not find a violation of the fourth category about lawful behavior.
- The trial court revoked twelve years of the suspended portion and ordered Jenkins to serve that term in the Department of Correction with no return to probation.
- Jenkins appealed, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the revocation and the twelve-year sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the probation revocation was an abuse of discretion | Jenkins argued the State failed to prove violations sufficiently. | State contends proof by preponderance supported revocation. | No abuse; violations supported revocation. |
| Whether the twelve-year sanction was an abuse of discretion | Jenkins contends the twelve-year term is excessive given rehabilitation and circumstances. | State argues sanction appropriate given multiple violations and history. | No abuse; twelve-year term affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184 (Ind.2007) (abuse of discretion standard for probation violations)
- J.J.C. v. State, 792 N.E.2d 85 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (probation violations proven by preponderance; evaluating sufficiency)
- Richardson v. State, 890 N.E.2d 766 (Ind.Ct.App.2008) (preponderance standard; credibility not reweighed)
- Runyon v. State, 939 N.E.2d 613 (Ind.2010) (burden to prove ability to pay and bona fide efforts)
- Jones v. State, 838 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind.Ct.App.2005) (probation is a matter of grace, not a right)
- Carswell v. State, 721 N.E.2d 1255 (Ind.Ct.App.1999) (rehabilitation and public safety considerations in probation context)