Thompson v. State, 172 So. 3d 527

Defendant Keith Thompson pled to a six-month residential behavior-modification program at Spectrum for bipolar disorder and three years probation after a 2010 knife-possession charge; as a habitual offender he faced longer exposure.
Thompson absconded from Spectrum in late 2010; his probation was modified and Spectrum participation extended to 18 months.
After ~13 months, Spectrum staff alleged Thompson threatened two staff members (one his therapist), a knife was found hidden under his dresser drawer, he was discharged for aggression, and he changed residence without probation officer consent.
At the July 16, 2013 probation-violation hearing the court heard live testimony (including Thompson and Spectrum staff); the court found willful violations and revoked probation.
The court also relied on uncharged alleged infractions (bringing excess cash and an over-the-counter topical medication) as part of the aggregate basis for revocation.
At resentencing (Aug. 27, 2013) Thompson received 15 years in prison; he appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether constructive possession of the knife was proven	State: knife found in Thompson's room supports possession and rule violation	Thompson: knife not in plain view, multiple possible occupants, no fingerprints — no proof of knowledge or dominion	Reversed as to knife: constructive possession not proven; knife cannot support revocation
Whether threats and failure to complete Spectrum justified revocation	State: threats to staff and discharge for aggression are willful, substantial violations	Thompson: challenges sufficiency of proof for some allegations	Affirmed as to threats and failure to complete program — sufficient willful and substantial violations
Whether the court could rely on uncharged infractions (excess money, OTC medication)	State: court may consider conduct showing rule violations	Thompson: revocation on uncharged grounds violates due process	Reversed as to money and medication: court may not revoke based on allegations not in affidavit
Whether sentence must be vacated due to reliance on invalid grounds	State: remaining valid violations support revocation and sentence	Thompson: invalid grounds were substantial and may have influenced sentence	Court vacated sentence and remanded for resentencing because reversed grounds were part of the basis and one was substantial

State v. Carter, 835 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 2002) (standard of review for probation revocation)
Lawson v. State, 969 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2007) (probation violation must be willful and substantial)
Gonzalez v. State, 832 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 2002) (state must prove constructive possession)
Jennings v. State, 124 So. 3d 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (elements of constructive possession: knowledge and dominion)
Johnson v. State, 456 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (mere proximity to contraband insufficient for possession)
Brown v. State, 8 So. 3d 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (factors undermining constructive-possession inference)
Earle v. State, 745 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (similar holdings on lack of possession proof)
Wells v. State, 60 So. 3d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (cannot revoke probation on uncharged violations)
Richardson v. State, 694 So. 2d 147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (due process prohibits revocation based on uncharged grounds)
Secure v. State, 432 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (remand for resentencing where invalid grounds may have affected sentence)