State v. Aslin, 421 P.3d 843

In 2013 Aslin pleaded guilty to methamphetamine trafficking; court suspended a 9-year sentence and imposed 3 years probation.
His probation order required him to follow probation officer instructions, including entering and completing drug treatment if deemed appropriate.
After testing positive for alcohol, Aslin admitted a 2014 violation, was reinstated to probation, and enrolled in the First Judicial District’s Technical Violation Program (TVP).
While in the TVP he had two positive meth tests and received short jail sanctions; in October 2015 he was arrested on new-charges allegations and charged in a probation-violation report with new offenses and failure to enter treatment.
At the November 13, 2015 hearing the court found insufficient proof of new criminal offenses but concluded Aslin willfully failed to enter/complete outpatient treatment, revoked probation, and imposed prison time.
On appeal the court affirmed the willfulness finding but held that the failure to enter treatment was a TVP "technical violation," vacated revocation, and remanded for TVP sanctions (fourth violation rules) and reinstatement of probation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence proved a willful probation violation (failure to enter/complete treatment)	State: probation officer testimony and signed probation order established a prima facie willful breach	Aslin: failure to obtain treatment was due to factors beyond his control; not willful	Affirmed — State met burden; Aslin offered no evidence to rebut the inference of willfulness
Whether the violation was a "technical violation" under the First Judicial District TVP and thus subject to TVP sanctions rather than revocation	State: court treated failure to enter treatment as more than a technical violation and revoked probation	Aslin: failure to enter/complete treatment falls within TVP definitions of technical violations and should be sanctioned under the TVP progressive scheme	Reversed and remanded — court misapplied Rule 5-805(C); without new criminal charges the failure to enter treatment is a TVP technical violation; vacate revocation, reinstate probation, impose TVP sanction for a third violation (14 days jail)

State v. Leon, 292 P.3d 493 (N.M. Ct. App.) (discusses burden-shifting: State must prove violation; once prima facie shown defendant must come forward to rebut willfulness)
In re Bruno R., 66 P.3d 339 (N.M. Ct. App.) (State must prove willful conduct to establish probation violation)
State v. Martinez, 775 P.2d 1321 (N.M. Ct. App.) (once State establishes violation, defendant must show non-willfulness or excuse)
State v. Parsons, 717 P.2d 99 (N.M. Ct. App.) (same principle regarding burden to rebut non-willfulness)
Fogelson v. Wallace, 406 P.3d 1012 (N.M. Ct. App.) (gives effect to plain meaning of rules when language is clear)