State of Tennessee v. Roy D. Moore, E2016-00206-CCA-R3-CD

In 2010 Roy D. Moore pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated assault and received a five-year sentence to be served on probation.
After a 2014 probation violation the trial court extended Moore’s probation by one year.
In July 2015 a probation violation warrant issued based on Moore’s arrest for domestic assault, a positive drug screen for cocaine, and alcohol use.
At the revocation hearing Moore admitted drinking, cocaine use, and pleaded guilty to a new domestic assault charge; his probation officer testified to four violations (failure to notify of address change, new arrest, positive drug test, alcohol use).
The trial court revoked probation and ordered Moore to serve the balance of his sentence in confinement; Moore appealed arguing the court should have offered substance abuse treatment before ordering confinement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Moore)	Held
Whether sufficient evidence supported revocation of probation	Substantial evidence (admissions and officer testimony) established violations warranting revocation	Admitted violations but argued confinement was an abuse because treatment should have been offered first	Court affirmed: record supports finding of probation violations and revocation was not an abuse of discretion
Whether the trial court abused discretion in ordering confinement without first offering treatment	Court properly exercised discretion after revocation; statutes allow confinement	Requested substance abuse treatment instead of confinement	Held: court within statutory authority to order confinement after revocation
Standard of review for probation revocation	Revocation reviewed for abuse of discretion	Same	Applied abuse-of-discretion standard; no abuse found
Credibility determinations at revocation hearings	Trial judge’s credibility assessments are controlling	Same	Credibility for trial judge; testimony and defendant’s admissions supported revocation

State v. Harkins, 811 S.W.2d 79 (Tenn. 1991) (probation revocation reviewed under abuse-of-discretion standard)
State v. Williamson, 619 S.W.2d 145 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1981) (abuse-of-discretion principle in revocation appeals)
State v. Delp, 614 S.W.2d 395 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1980) (no substantial evidence of violation establishes abuse of discretion)
State v. Shaffer, 45 S.W.3d 553 (Tenn. 2001) (discussing standards for revocation review)
State v. Grear, 568 S.W.2d 285 (Tenn. 1978) (probation revocation principles)
Carver v. State, 570 S.W.2d 872 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1978) (credibility determinations are for the trial judge)
Bledsoe v. State, 378 S.W.2d 811 (Tenn. 1965) (credibility and factfinding at revocation hearings)