Probation Violations
In our American system of criminal justice, you are presumed innocent of all crimes until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a prosecuting official. If you or your loved one is accused or charged with a criminal offense, do NOT, under any circumstances, talk to the police. Reveal only your name, date of birth, address, and telephone number to the police, and do NOT consent to a police search or government official search of your body, home, telephone, computer, or vehicle without a search warrant. If you are facing questioning from a police officer or prosecuting official, contact Lansing criminal defense attorney Eric J. Sheppard immediately at 517-618-1580, and let Eric J. Sheppard fight for your rights.
If you are facing a probation violation, then contact our office for immediate assistance at 517-618-1580.
Probation violation proceedings are special proceedings that do not follow typical court room procedures. The rules of evidence do not apply. The prosecuting attorney and the probation department only has the burden of proving that you committed a probation violation by a preponderance of the evidence, which is the lowest burden of proof in the criminal justice system and legal system at large.
However, that does not mean that you have zero rights as a probationer.
A probationer still has the right to a procedure consisting of: (1) a factual determination that the probationer is in fact guilty of violating probation, and (2) a discretionary determination of whether the violation warrants revocation. People v Laurent, 171 Mich App 503, 505; 431 NW2d 202 (1988).
Further, probation revocation cannot be based solely on a defendant's arrest on subsequent charges. There must be verified facts on the record where the court can find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a violation was committed. This defect is not cured by the defendant's conviction on the subsequent charges. People v. Buckner, 103 Mich. App. 301 (1980). And a probation officer may not simply read the contents of a police report for subsequent charges to substantiate a probation violation.
Further, a defendant may choose incarceration and refuse probation. This was originally set forth in the case of People v Peterson, 62 Mich App 258, 265; 233 NW2d 250 (1975). In 2019, the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the longstanding law from People v Peterson. See People v Joseph Robert Bensch, Michigan Court of Appeals No.: 341585, for publication April 30, 2019. The Bensch panel ruled that a trial court may place an individual on probation if the trial court determines that the individual "is not likely again to engage in an offensive or criminal course of conduct and that the public good does not require that the defendant suffer the penalty imposed by law." MCL 771.1(1). The Michigan Legislature has long described a trial court's decision to grant probation "as a matter of grace." People v Sattler, 20 Mich App 665, 669; 174 NW2d 605 (1969). Accordingly, a defendant may decline a sentence of probation and instead seek a sentence of incarceration.
If you are facing a probation violation charge, call my office right away.
The Law Office of Eric J. Sheppard
2109 Hamilton Road, Suite 206
Okemos MI 48864
[email protected]
PH: 517-618-1580 (office)
PH: 216-973-9996 (cell)
Fax: 517-913-6321
If you are facing a probation violation, then contact our office for immediate assistance at 517-618-1580.
Probation violation proceedings are special proceedings that do not follow typical court room procedures. The rules of evidence do not apply. The prosecuting attorney and the probation department only has the burden of proving that you committed a probation violation by a preponderance of the evidence, which is the lowest burden of proof in the criminal justice system and legal system at large.
However, that does not mean that you have zero rights as a probationer.
A probationer still has the right to a procedure consisting of: (1) a factual determination that the probationer is in fact guilty of violating probation, and (2) a discretionary determination of whether the violation warrants revocation. People v Laurent, 171 Mich App 503, 505; 431 NW2d 202 (1988).
Further, probation revocation cannot be based solely on a defendant's arrest on subsequent charges. There must be verified facts on the record where the court can find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a violation was committed. This defect is not cured by the defendant's conviction on the subsequent charges. People v. Buckner, 103 Mich. App. 301 (1980). And a probation officer may not simply read the contents of a police report for subsequent charges to substantiate a probation violation.
Further, a defendant may choose incarceration and refuse probation. This was originally set forth in the case of People v Peterson, 62 Mich App 258, 265; 233 NW2d 250 (1975). In 2019, the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the longstanding law from People v Peterson. See People v Joseph Robert Bensch, Michigan Court of Appeals No.: 341585, for publication April 30, 2019. The Bensch panel ruled that a trial court may place an individual on probation if the trial court determines that the individual "is not likely again to engage in an offensive or criminal course of conduct and that the public good does not require that the defendant suffer the penalty imposed by law." MCL 771.1(1). The Michigan Legislature has long described a trial court's decision to grant probation "as a matter of grace." People v Sattler, 20 Mich App 665, 669; 174 NW2d 605 (1969). Accordingly, a defendant may decline a sentence of probation and instead seek a sentence of incarceration.
If you are facing a probation violation charge, call my office right away.
The Law Office of Eric J. Sheppard
2109 Hamilton Road, Suite 206
Okemos MI 48864
[email protected]
PH: 517-618-1580 (office)
PH: 216-973-9996 (cell)
Fax: 517-913-6321