Roberts v. State
687 So. 2d 1238, 1996 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 164, 1996 WL 342268
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Roberts v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 735 So. 2d 1244 →
Opinions
Charles Leon Roberts appeals from his probation revocation. The revocation order states that Roberts violated the terms of his probation by being charged with theft. The constitutional presumption of innocence prohibits probation revocation on the basis of hollow accusations. See Allen v. State, 644 So.2d 46 (Ala.Cr.App.1994). We remand the case for an amended order stating whether the trial court was reasonably satisfied that Roberts was guilty of the theft charge, and, if so, the evidence it relied upon.
[1239]*1239REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Roberts v. State, 687 So. 2d 1238, 1996 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 164, 1996 WL 342268 (Ala. Ct. App. 1996).
687 So. 2d 1238 (Roberts v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Morrissey v. Brewer
408 U.S. 471 (Supreme Court, 1972)
Gagnon v. Scarpelli
411 U.S. 778 (Supreme Court, 1973)
Roberson v. State
572 So. 2d 1323 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1990)
Holcomb v. State
644 So. 2d 46 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1994)
Free v. State
392 So. 2d 857 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1980)
Ex Parte Free
392 So. 2d 859 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1981)