State v. Reed, 123238

Reed was convicted in two separate cases: robbery (Case No. 17CR1479) and criminal threat plus misdemeanor domestic battery (Case No. 18CR1748).
Sentences: 43 months (with dispositional departure to 36 months' probation) in 17CR1479; 7 months (felony) plus 6 months consecutive (misdemeanor), with 36 months' probation in 18CR1748; the latter was ordered consecutive to the former.
While on probation Reed committed new offenses: criminal damage to property and battery arising from a domestic violence incident involving the mother of his child.
At an evidentiary hearing the district court found probation violations, revoked Reed’s probation in both cases, and ordered he serve his original sentences.
Reed appealed, arguing the district court abused its discretion by refusing to reinstate probation; he conceded courts may bypass intermediate sanctions when new crimes occur.
The Kansas Court of Appeals affirmed, holding revocation was lawful and not an abuse of discretion under the applicable statutory provisions allowing bypass of intermediate sanctions (including when probation followed a dispositional departure).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court abused its discretion by revoking Reed's probation and ordering execution of the original sentences	Reed argued the court should have reinstated probation (abuse of discretion in revocation)	The State argued new crimes allowed bypassing intermediate sanctions and revocation was within the court's discretion (also dispositional departure permits bypass)	Court affirmed: revocation was not arbitrary or an abuse of discretion; bypassing intermediate sanctions was permitted

State v. Gumfory, 281 Kan. 1168 (2006) (probation revocation generally rests within district court discretion)
State v. Mosher, 299 Kan. 1 (2014) (abuse-of-discretion standard described)
State v. Stafford, 296 Kan. 25 (2012) (party asserting abuse of discretion bears the burden of proof)