Articles on probation - Page 5 of 16

I can’t be the only one who has a tough time keeping track of what sanctions are permissible in response to different types of probation violations in different types of cases. It’s the kind of thing that requires a chart. And you know I love a chart.

In North Carolina, probationers, post-release supervisees, and parolees are subject to warrantless searches—sometimes by a probation-parole officer, sometimes by law enforcement officers. The statutory conditions that apply to each type of offender and officer are not identical. Today’s post collects them all in one place. Before getting into any of the complicated issues about the constitutionality of a warrantless search of a supervised offender, a sensible starting point is a careful look at the language of the search condition itself.

What’s a structured intervention worksheet? What’s a Carey Guide? And what do judges and lawyers need to know about those things to interface with Probation effectively?

Can a court respond to the same offending behavior by a probationer more than once?

Not all changes to a person’s probation happen after a hearing. Many changes are made in chambers (or some other location other than the courtroom), with the consent of the parties. Though it happens all the time, the General Statutes don’t really say much about it. Today’s post covers some of the issues that can arise.

Who can dismiss a probation violation?

Any person, felon or misdemeanant, can be on probation for up to 5 years. In some cases—assuming you did the extension just right—probation could be as long as 8 years. So, there are some pretty old probation cases hanging around. But probation in North Carolina doesn’t look the same as it looked eight years ago. If you read this blog, you know that there have been many changes to North Carolina’s probation law over the past half-decade or so. The proper way to handle a violation hearing varies for the 86,653 people on probation today, depending on the date of their underlying offense, the date they were placed on probation, the date of their alleged violation, and the date of the violation hearing itself. Today’s post pulls a summary of those changes into one place, in the hope that it will help you apply the right law to the particular probationer before the court.

Last week, through a North Carolina Judicial College program, a group of judges, lawyers, and clerks visited DART Cherry, the state’s lone residential chemical dependency treatment facility for male probationers and parolees. It was an informative visit that, frankly, busted some myths about DART Cherry. Today’s post passes along some of what we learned.

Probation violations need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. All that’s required is sufficient evidence to “reasonably satisfy” the judge that a violation occurred. What constitutes competent evidence of a probation violation? And how much proof is enough?

State v. Hancock, decided this week by the court of appeals, sheds new light on violations of the commit no criminal offense probation condition involving a pending charge.