Joshua T. Trammell v. State of Indiana, 45 N.E.3d 1212

Trammell pled guilty in July 2010 to two Class D felonies (resisting law enforcement — Cause 158; theft — Cause 401) and received concurrent 2-year sentences with 9 months suspended to probation in each case.
He began probation after release from DOC; dates of initial releases and re-releases are not clearly shown in the record.
A probation-violation petition was filed in Cause 158 on May 2, 2012; a warrant issued May 7, 2012, and on July 17, 2012 the court revoked probation in Cause 158 and ordered Trammell to serve four months in DOC (with 47 days credit).
Later the probation department filed a petition in Cause 401 alleging missed reporting dates in April 2013 and positive opiate drug screens on March 28, 2013 and May 10, 2013; a revocation hearing on Cause 401 occurred December 18, 2014.
The trial court found a probation violation in Cause 401 and ordered five months of previously suspended time to be executed; Trammell appealed arguing the alleged violations occurred after his probationary period had ended.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court could revoke probation based on alleged violations in Cause 401	The State argued Trammell failed to report and tested positive for opiates during his probationary period (as pleaded), and Trammell admitted the conduct at hearing.	Trammell argued the alleged violations occurred after his probationary period had ended (probation had been tolled and modified by prior revocation), so the court lacked authority to revoke.	Reversed — the State failed to prove by a preponderance that the violations occurred during the probationary period, so revocation was an abuse of discretion.

Dawson v. State, 751 N.E.2d 812 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (violation must occur during probationary period though disposition may occur later)
Hardy v. State, 975 N.E.2d 833 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (two-step probation revocation process and burden of proof)
Ripps v. State, 968 N.E.2d 323 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (revocation reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Slinkard v. State, 625 N.E.2d 1282 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993) (issuance of warrant tolls probation)
Hart v. State, 889 N.E.2d 1266 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (one cannot be simultaneously on probation and serving an executed sentence)
Jones v. State, 885 N.E.2d 1286 (Ind. 2008) (revocation proceedings modify conditional suspension, not re-sentence)
Puckett v. State, 956 N.E.2d 1182 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (defendant entitled to plea-bargain benefits in probation revocation)
Schaefer v. Kumar, 804 N.E.2d 184 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (appellate courts may not consider matters outside the record)