Background
Jayeson Manuel Pabon pleaded guilty to second degree assault in February 2023. Under a stipulated sentence, he received 16 years in the Department of Corrections, suspended on the condition that he complete eight years of probation. His probation required treatment, initially at Other Side Academy and later through the 90-day residential START program.
While in START, staff found a prohibited phone in Pabon’s room. Investigators concluded that Pabon used his TextNow account to create sexually suggestive messages appearing to come from his case manager, then sent screenshots to his girlfriend. START discharged him for violating its rule against creating or altering documents to deceive. His probation officer also alleged other violations, including unauthorized absences, missed testing, and failure to complete required programs. The district court revoked probation, imposed the stipulated 16-year DOC sentence, and awarded 380 days of presentence confinement credit without credit for 57 days in START.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that the prosecution needed to prove the START-rule violation by a preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt. The revocation was based on violating a program rule, rather than on a charge that Pabon committed a new criminal offense. Although some conduct covered by the rule could potentially resemble forgery, the rule did not necessarily establish criminal forgery and Pabon was not charged or convicted of that offense.
The court also found sufficient evidence supporting the district court’s credibility findings and conclusion that Pabon fabricated the messages. Hall’s testimony was admissible and Pabon had a meaningful opportunity to challenge it through cross-examination and his own testimony. Finally, Pabon did not establish that the restrictions in START amounted to confinement warranting additional presentence credit, particularly where he did not complete the program and supplied no further evidence after the district court invited it.
Key Takeaways
- A probation-condition violation is generally proved by a preponderance of the evidence, even if the conduct might also be criminal.
- Probation-revocation courts may credit testimony about electronic messages and resolve disputes over authorship and credibility.
- A defendant seeking presentence confinement credit bears the burden to show that a treatment program imposed confinement-level restrictions.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces the distinction between a probation revocation based on noncompliance with a probation condition and one based on a new criminal offense. The latter can trigger the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard; the former ordinarily does not.
It also underscores the narrower procedural protections at revocation hearings. Hearsay with probative value may be considered when the probationer has a fair chance to rebut it, and residential treatment does not automatically qualify for sentence credit.