State of Tennessee Taylor Wolfinger

Maryville, Tennessee probation criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant.

On October 24, 2022, Defendant pleaded guilty to aggravated domestic assault, a Class C felony. The trial court sentenced Defendant to three years imprisonment, which it suspended to supervised probation. The court also included in its judgment the following special conditions of Defendant's probation: an alcohol and drug assessment, a batterer's intervention program, and an affidavit stating that Defendant had dispossessed his firearms.



Less than one year later, on September 25, 2023, an affidavit of violation of probation was filed against Defendant. It stated that Defendant had been arrested on May 17, 2023, by the McMinn County Sheriff's Department on charges of felony aggravated domestic assault; felony possession of methamphetamine with intent to sell or deliver; and misdemeanor possession of unlawful drug paraphernalia.



The trial court held a revocation hearing on November 13, 2023. Only one witness testified-Deputy Sarah Gray. At the time of the hearing, Deputy Gray had been with the McMinn County Sheriff's Department for approximately three years. On May 15, 2023, the same victim from Defendant's original domestic assault conviction called 911 after an altercation with Defendant. A portion of the 911 call was played for the court and admitted as an exhibit to the hearing. On the call, the victim and her children can be heard. Deputy Gray responded to the 911 call, but Defendant fled the scene before she arrived at the victim's residence. Deputy Gray testified that upon her arrival, the victim was "crying" and "hysterical." Deputy Gray also observed that the victim "had red marks and scratches on both sides of her neck." While at the residence, Deputy Gray took statements from the victim and her children who witnessed the incident.



Two days later, Deputy Gray, along with another deputy, returned to the same residence to arrest Defendant for aggravated domestic assault based on the May 15 incident. Defendant was outside of the residence when they arrived. During the course of the arrest, the other deputy patted Defendant down, and inside Defendant's "left cargo pocket, an extra[-]large Sharpie [pen] was found." When the deputies opened the pen, they discovered that it had been "hollowed out." Inside the hollowed-out pen "was a baggie that contained a crystal-like substance which was determined to be methamphetamine weighing at 24.17 grams." Defendant also "had $925 cash in his pocket" at the time. Deputy Gray acknowledged that, since the time she arrested Defendant, the most recent aggravated domestic battery charge against Defendant had been dismissed. The drug charges, however, had been bound over to the McMinn County Grand Jury.



Defendant chose not to testify or offer any proof at the hearing.



Following Deputy Gray's testimony, Defendant's counsel argued that the only evidence before the court was "proof merely that the charges [had] been brought." He did acknowledge, however, that Defendant clearly had "significant drug problems." Defendant, therefore, proposed that if the court found a violation had been committed, the consequence should be a partial revocation and reinstatement to an alternative sentence. Specifically, he asked the court to sentence Defendant to 120 days of confinement along with an alcohol and drug assessment and a no-contact order with the victim.



The State asked the court to completely revoke Defendant's probation. In support, the State pointed to the victim's 911 call, during which one of the victim's children said, "I think my mom is about to die." Further, it argued that Defendant had been ordered to complete an alcohol and drug assessment and have no contact with the victim as conditions of his original sentence. Despite that, the State noted the two were living together. The State conceded that the new drug charges were only pending at the time of the revocation hearing but argued that it was at Defendant's request that the probation violation had proceeded to the revocation hearing. The State said it had been willing to wait until the drug charges were resolved, but Defendant pushed to move forward with the hearing more quickly.



The trial court agreed that it was uncontested Defendant's aggravated assault had been dismissed. The court noted, however, that Defendant had felony and misdemeanor drug charges still pending resolution. The court further noted that simply being in possession of illegal drugs is a violation of Defendant's probation conditions. The court said that it had not heard "much of a contest that the rules of probation have been violated." As a result, the court found that "the State has met its burden . . . and proven that [Defendant] has violated the terms and conditions of supervised probation and therefore probation is revoked."...

State v. Wolfinger, E2023-01752-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sep 03, 2024)

Affirmed