State v. Carlos Burris ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •               IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
    AT JACKSON
    STATE OF TENNESSEE,                       )
    )
    Appellee,                          ) C. C. A. NO. W1999-01728-CCA-R3-CD
    )
    vs.                                       ) MADISON COUNTY
    )
    CARLOS E. BURRIS,                         ) No. 97-321-22; 97-812
    Appellant.
    )
    )                   FILED
    March 17, 2000
    ORDER                Cecil Crowson, Jr.
    Appellate Court Clerk
    This matter is before the Court upon the state’s motion to affirm the trial
    court judgment by order pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals.
    The appellant is appealing the trial court’s revocation of his probation. After a hearing
    on the matter, the trial court found that the appellant violated the terms and conditions
    of his probation. The appellant and his probation officer testified at the hearing.
    A trial court may revoke probation and order the imposition of the original
    sentence upon a finding by a preponderance of the evidence that the person has
    violated a condition of probation. T.C.A. § 40-35-311(e). The decision to revoke
    probation rests within the sound discretion of the trial court. State v. Mitchell, 
    810 S.W.2d 733
    , 735 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991). Revocation of probation is subject to an
    abuse of discretion standard of review, rather than a de novo standard. State v.
    Harkins, 
    811 S.W.2d 79
     (Tenn. 1991). Discretion is abused only if the record contains
    no substantial evidence to support the conclusion of the trial court that a violation of
    probation has occurred. Id.; State v. Gregory, 
    946 S.W.2d 829
    , 832 (Tenn. Crim. App.
    1997). Proof of a violation need not be established beyond a reasonable doubt, and
    the evidence need only show that the trial judge exercised a conscientious and
    intelligent judgment, rather than acting arbitrarily. Gregory, 946 S.W.2d at 832; State v.
    Leach, 
    914 S.W.2d 104
    , 106 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995).
    Having reviewed the record in light of the appellant’s argument, we find
    that the evidence fully supports the trial court’s action. The appellant has simply failed
    to show how the trial court abused its discretion.
    Accordingly, the state’s motion is granted. It is hereby ORDERED that the
    judgement of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 20, Rules of the Court of
    Criminal Appeals. Costs of this appeal shall be assessed to the state.
    ______________________________
    DAVID G. HAYES, JUDGE
    ______________________________
    JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE
    ______________________________
    JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, JUDGE
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: W1999-01728-CCA-R3-CD

Filed Date: 3/17/2000

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014