State v. Bilek, 392 P.3d 990

Bilek pleaded no contest to second-degree kidnapping; sentence of 1–15 years was suspended and he was placed on 60 months probation with special conditions (no alcohol/nonprescribed drugs; no female overnight stays without AP&P approval).
About 40 days into probation, AP&P agents found a woman (E.C.) in Bilek’s hotel room; she admitted staying overnight, and drugs, paraphernalia, and photos/videos of E.C. unconscious or naked were discovered.
AP&P filed an amended violation report alleging multiple probation violations: overnight female stay, possession/distribution of heroin and methamphetamine, possession of paraphernalia, forcible sexual abuse, and voyeurism by concealed electronic equipment, among others.
At the combined probation-revocation evidentiary hearing and preliminary hearing on new charges, agents and E.C. testified; drug testing confirmed heroin/methamphetamine, and photos/videos depicted an incoherent or unconscious naked woman on top of naked Bilek.
The district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Bilek willfully violated the probation conditions (all alleged violations), revoked probation, and imposed the original 1–15 year prison sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether probation revocation was supported by sufficient evidence	State: evidence showed multiple willful violations supporting revocation	Bilek: some allegations (voyeurism) insufficient; challenges certain findings	Court: affirmed revocation; sufficient evidence of multiple violations justified sentence
Whether voyeurism conviction required a “concealed or disguised” device	State: not necessary to resolve because other violations suffice	Bilek: phone photos/videos were taken openly, so voyeurism element not met	Court: declined to resolve voyeurism claim as unnecessary to outcome
Whether the no-overnight-female special condition was waived/dropped	State: condition remained and was signed; violation proved	Bilek: asserted condition had been dropped and should be waived	Court: record shows Bilek agreed to condition; violation proven
Whether a single remaining valid violation would suffice or remand required (Legg issue)	Bilek: if one violation is invalid, remand needed if unsure remaining would cause revocation	State: multiple independent violations supported revocation	Court: unlike Legg, multiple unchallenged violations supported revocation; no remand required

State v. Legg, 324 P.3d 656 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (single valid probation violation may be insufficient to affirm revocation if court not confident it alone would have produced revocation)
State v. Maestas, 997 P.2d 314 (Utah Ct. App. 2000) (on appeal, evidence of probation violation is viewed in the light most favorable to trial court findings)