State v. John F. Wolard

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: April 16, 1997
• Docket: 01C01-9612-CC-00532
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE FILED APRIL SESSION, 1997 April 16, 1997

Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Court Clerk STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) C.C.A. NO. 01C01-9612-CC-00532 Appellee, ) ) MONTGOMERY COUNTY VS. ) (No. 35284 Below) ) JOHN F. WOLARD, ) The Hon. John H. Gasaway ) Appellant. ) (Probation Revocation)

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

N. REESE BAGWELL JOHN KNOX WALKUP 116 South Second Street Attorney General & Reporter P.O. Box 427 Clarksville, TN 37041 KATHY MORANTE Deputy Attorney General 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, TN 37243-0493

JOHN WESLEY CARNEY, JR. District Attorney General

STEVE GARRETT Assistant District Attorney General 204 Franklin Street Suite 200 Clarksville, TN 37040

OPINION FILED ______________________

AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20

PER CURIAM OPINION

The appellant appeals as of right pursuant to Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules

of Appellate Procedure from the trial court’s revocation of his probation. Although a

hearing was held on the matter, the transcript of the proceedings is not included in the

record on appeal. In revoking the appellant’s probation, the trial court found that the state

had proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the appellant failed to report weekly,

failed to make progress in the MRT program, failed to pay fines and court costs, and failed

to pay probation fees. Without a record of the evidence introduced at the hearing, we

cannot conclude that the trial judge erred in revoking the appellant's probation. See State

v. Ballard, 855 S.W.2d 557, 560-61 (Tenn.1993). Accordingly, after a review of the record,

it is the opinion of this Court the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed pursuant to

Rule 20, Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals Rules.

PER CURIAM (Judges Wade, Welles, and Witt)

- 2 -