Ronald D. Allaback v. The State of Wyoming, 318 P.3d 827

Ronald D. Allaback pleaded guilty (2004) to three counts of felony identity theft; original prison sentences were suspended in favor of eight years supervised probation.
The State filed three earlier petitions to revoke probation (2008–2009); each time the court revoked and reinstated probation; the third reinstatement included placement in an intensive supervision program (ISP).
In November 2011 the State filed a fourth petition to revoke alleging multiple violations (missed appointments, presence in bars, .091 BAC, maintaining a checking account, failing to follow schedule).
At the April 2012 revocation hearing the State amended an affidavit to change several event dates from August to September 2011; defense counsel conceded the amendment did not prejudice preparation.
The district court found Allaback violated probation (checking account, being in a bar, .091 BAC, missed appointments), revoked probation, and imposed the original 5–9 year sentence with credit for time served.
Allaback failed to timely appeal; after a certiorari petition this Court restored his appeal based on a district-court finding that trial counsel was ineffective for not filing a requested appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether last-minute amendment to affidavit denied due process/adequate notice	Allaback: amendment of dates deprived him of notice and counsel’s waiver was inadequate	State: notice was adequate; dates garbled but Allaback admitted conduct and counsel waived prejudice	Court: no due process violation; specificity of dates not required and admissions waived notice claim
Whether administrative sanctions previously imposed bar revocation (double punishment)	Allaback: had been sanctioned via ISP for same violations, so revocation is barred	State: no §7-13-1107 administrative sanctions (no jail, loss of privileges, or community correction imposed); ISP participation is not the same as administrative sanction	Court: Umbach inapplicable; no prior statutory administrative sanctions were imposed; revocation allowed
Whether probation officers’ subjective judgments supplied improper grounds for revocation	Allaback: officer interpretations (e.g., Moose Lodge activity) were subjective and insufficient	State: independent evidence and admissions supported violations regardless of officers’ opinions	Court: declined to address subjectivity; Allaback’s admissions independently supported revocation
Whether revocation constituted an abuse of discretion	Allaback: procedural errors and re-use of prior sanctions rendered revocation excessive	State: revocation supported by evidence and lawful	Court: no abuse of discretion; revocation affirmed

Sinning v. State, 172 P.3d 388 (Wyo. 2007) (describing two-part probation revocation process and due process protections)
Murphy v. State, 592 P.2d 1159 (Wyo. 1979) (notice of conduct need not be as specific as an indictment; vague dates can suffice)
Umbach v. State, 42 P.3d 1006 (Wyo. 2002) (administrative sanctions under §7-13-1107 may bar subsequent probation revocation when such statutory sanctions were actually imposed)
Counts v. State, 197 P.3d 1280 (Wyo. 2008) (admission of a probation violation waives due process notice claim)