Tommy Lampley v. State of Indiana
2015 Ind. App. LEXIS 421
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- In 1998 Lampley pled guilty to assisting a criminal (Class C) and received an 8-year sentence: 5 years executed and 3 years suspended to probation, to be served consecutively to a prior cocaine conviction.
- In March 2014 the trial court modified placement to Madison County Work Release; Lampley arrived March 11, 2014.
- From March 12–29, 2014 Lampley received ~20 conduct reports at work release (including positive marijuana test and threats); work release filed to terminate him and he was remanded to county jail.
- At an April 7 evidentiary hearing Lampley admitted violating work release rules and asked for a short sanction; probation filed a notice alleging failure to complete executed time and failure to behave in society.
- At the April 21 hearing Lampley admitted smoking marijuana while on release; the court found he violated work release and probation and revoked his suspended sentence, ordering him to serve it in the Department of Correction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion in revoking probation | State: probation may be revoked for violation proven by evidence or admission | Lampley: revocation improper because failure to complete work release was not a probation condition and record lacks proof he engaged in unlawful conduct | Court affirmed: revocation valid because (1) revocation was not premised on non-probationary work-release completion, and (2) Lampley admitted to smoking marijuana while on probation, supporting revocation |
Key Cases Cited
- Ripps v. State, 968 N.E.2d 323 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (standard of review and substantial evidence rule for probation revocation)
- Whatley v. State, 847 N.E.2d 1007 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (State need not show new-crime conviction to establish probation violation)
- Heaton v. State, 984 N.E.2d 614 (Ind. 2013) (probation violation proven by preponderance of evidence)
- Crump v. State, 740 N.E.2d 564 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (probationary period begins immediately after sentencing; court may revoke prospectively)
- Ashley v. State, 717 N.E.2d 927 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (same principle regarding start of probationary period)
- Smith v. State, 504 N.E.2d 333 (Ind. Ct. App. 1987) (confession to new crime can support probation revocation)
- Atkins v. State, 546 N.E.2d 863 (Ind. Ct. App. 1989) (probation cannot be revoked for violation of a non-existent term)
- Johnson v. State, 692 N.E.2d 485 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998) (discusses necessity of entering probation conditions into evidence)