Hollis v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Hollis v. State

598 So. 2d 38, 1992 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 192, 1992 WL 92549

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedMarch 13, 1992

DocketCR 91-266

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 598 So. 2d 38 (Hollis v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hollis v. State, 598 So. 2d 38, 1992 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 192, 1992 WL 92549 (Ala. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an appeal from a revocation of probation.

The appellant's revocation was based on the testimony of probation officer Robert G. Wiley that the appellant had been referred to him by another probation officer who had filed a motion to revoke based on three charges which occurred in Baldwin County. Those charges are evidenced in the record by the "supervisor's report on delinquent probationer" filed by Alabama Probation and Parole Officer Terri D. Luker. R. 10-11. Mr. Wiley testified that the complaint "said she pled guilty." R. 2. He also testified that the appellant was arrested again after those charges on "[t]hree more shoplifting cases at Riviera Centre in Foley." R. 3. Those arrests were evidenced by a report filed by Mr. Wiley.

Defense counsel objected to the revocation of probation because "the State has [not] presented sufficient evidence to revoke her probation." R. 4. That objection should have been sustained.

A "probation officer's report constitutes hearsay evidence and is insufficient to sustain a revocation of probation."Moore v. State, 432 So.2d 552, 553 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983). "[H]earsay evidence cannot be the sole support for revoking probation." Ex parte Belcher, 556 So.2d 366, 368 (Ala. 1989).

The order of the circuit court revoking the appellant's probation is reversed. This cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

This is an appeal from a revocation of probation.

The appellant's revocation was based on the testimony of probation officer Robert G. Wiley that the appellant had been referred to him by another probation officer who had filed a motion to revoke based on three charges which occurred in Baldwin County. Those charges are evidenced in the record by the "supervisor's report on delinquent probationer" filed by Alabama Probation and Parole Officer Terri D. Luker. R. 10-11. Mr. Wiley testified that the complaint "said she pled guilty." R. 2. He also testified that the appellant was arrested again after those charges on "[t]hree more shoplifting cases at Riviera Centre in Foley." R. 3. Those arrests were evidenced by a report filed by Mr. Wiley.

Defense counsel objected to the revocation of probation because "the State has [not] presented sufficient evidence to revoke her probation." R. 4. That objection should have been sustained.

A "probation officer's report constitutes hearsay evidence and is insufficient to sustain a revocation of probation."Moore v. State, 432 So.2d 552, 553 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983). "[H]earsay evidence cannot be the sole support for revoking probation." Ex parte Belcher, 556 So.2d 366, 368 (Ala. 1989).

The order of the circuit court revoking the appellant's probation is reversed. This cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

598 So. 2d 38, 1992 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 192, 1992 WL 92549, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hollis-v-state-alacrimapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack