Kimberly Heaton v. State of Indiana, 984 N.E.2d 614

Heaton pled guilty to Receiving Stolen Property (Class D) and was sentenced to 30 months with 24 months suspended to probation.
While on probation, Heaton was arrested for Theft (Class D).
State filed a Notice of Violation alleging five probation violations, including a new criminal offense.
Trial court found four violations, including the new offense, and ordered eighteen months of the suspended sentence to be served.
Court of Appeals reversed on the standard of proof for a new offense; Supreme Court granted transfer.
Court holds the proper standard is preponderance of the evidence and remands for reconsideration under Indiana Code § 35-38-2-3(e).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
What standard applies to proving a new offense on probation revocation	State: probable cause standard	Heaton: preponderance of the evidence	Preponderance standard; Cooper overruled.
Whether the trial court’s reference to probable cause was harmless error given it also held by preponderance	State: harmless since preponderance found	Record unclear which standard was applied	Remand for proper application of the standard.
Whether the case should be remanded for sanctions determination	N/A	Sanctions depend on proper finding of violation	Remanded to determine violation by preponderance and appropriate sanction.

Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184 (Ind. 2007) (probation is discretionary; abuse of discretion standard on appeal)
Cooper v. State, 917 N.E.2d 667 (Ind. 2009) (probation-revocation standard tied to probable cause (overruled))
Hoffa v. State, 267 Ind. 133 (1977) (probable cause standard prior to statute amendment)
Woods v. State, 892 N.E.2d 637 (Ind. 2008) (two-step probation revocation process; factual then sanctions)
State v. Cozart, 897 N.E.2d 478 (Ind. 2008) (abuse of discretion includes misinterpretation of law or statutory factors)
Axsom v. Axsom, 565 N.E.2d 1097 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991) (trial court abuse when misinterpreting law)