 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Banks v. Commonwealth5/6/2005
carpelli. They are: (1) written notice of the claimed violations of probation; (2) disclosure to the probationer of the evidence against him or her; (3) opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documentary evidence; (4) the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, unless the hearing officer specifically finds good cause for not allowing confrontation; (5) a neutral and detached hearing body; and (6) a written statement by the factfinder as to the evidence relied on and the reasons for revoking parole.
Where appropriate, conventional substitutes for live testimony, including affidavits, depositions, and documentary evidence, may be used; and hearsay evidence is admissible at these informal hearings.
We have reviewed the clerk's record and the videotape of the revocation hearing; and we conclude that the court met the constitutional due process requirements: Banks was provided with a written notice of the violations, she was informed of the evidence against her, and she was given an opportunity at the hearing to speak and produce evidence. There was no due process violation in the failure to call witnesses since hearsay is permitted during probation revocation hearings. Banks had a right and opportunity to challenge the content of the probation officer's report of the three positive tests for cocaine as set forth in the Notice of Preliminary Hearing. Banks was not prevented from obtaining independent blood or urine testing evidence herself or from presenting witnesses and documentary evidence at the revocation hearing.
We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Banks's probation and that the revocation hearing did not abridge Banks's due process rights.
ALL CONCUR.
Page 1 2 Kentucky DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|