Motion to Revoke Probation Comes

¶ … Motion to Revoke Probation

COMES NOW the probation officer and moves this Court to enter an order revoking the above named defendant's probation, and, in support thereof, states to the Court:

On January 15, 2012, the Court sentenced the above named defendant to six months incarceration for violation of §313.24 of the Revised Code. Imposition of said sentence was suspended pending successful completion of the terms of probation.

The defendant has violated the following terms of probation:

Defendant shall obey all laws

Defendant shall totally abstain from entering any location, including any convenience stores, of the Publix grocery chain.

Defendant shall enter and successfully complete a shoplifting/theft class, at his own expense. Such class shall be approved by his probation officer.

Defendant shall seek and maintain full-time employment.

The defendant violated the above terms of probation in that:

He was arrested for multiple charges on January 21, 2012.

He unlawfully entered the premises of a Publix store.

He failed to enter a shoplifting / theft class.

He failed to seek full-time employment.

WHEREFORE, the probation department prays the Court revoke the defendant's probation and enter an Order imposing the terms of the suspended sentence.

New Arrest Violation of Probation

TO the JUDGE of the ABOVE CAPTIONED COURT

On the 15th day of January, 2013, the above named defendant was granted probation twenty-four (24) months of probation for the violation of §313.24 of the Revised Code. Imposition of sentence was suspended pending successful completion of the terms of probation.

ALLEGED VIOLTIONS:

Terms of probation violated:

1. Defendant shall obey all laws.

7. Defendant shall totally abstain from entering any location, including any convenience stores, of the Publix grocery chain.

11. Defendant shall enter and successfully complete a shoplifting/theft class, at his own expense. Such class shall be approved by his probation officer.

12. Defendant shall seek and maintain full-time employment.

Violated probation as follows:

Defendant failed to not only seek admission to a shoplifting/theft class but also failed to complete said classes.

According to police department case number CRB12-123, on January 21, 2012 was arrested on multiple charges including trespass and assault.

PERFORMANCE on PROBATION: A complete report will be provided the court at the time of sentencing on the above referenced cases.

RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended that defendant remain in custody pending a resolution on the pending charges.

Presentence Investigation

Elements and Relevant Circumstances of the Offense:

On January 21, 2012 officers responded to a disturbance at the Publix store located at 2102 Milwaukee Road regarding a trespass and assault involving the defendant. Defendant was reportedly involved in a dispute with a security officer at said premises who recognized the defendant as being prohibited from entering such premises. When requested to leave the premises the defendant refused to do so and proceeded to assault the security officer by throwing a beverage at said officer and then, subsequently, slapping the same officer. The defendant was detained by the store security and arrested by the local police.

Victim's Statement

George Petrie, the chief security officer for Publix, states that his employer would like to see the defendant punished for his actions against his staff. Based upon the defendant's actions and statements, he is concerned that the defendant has no intention to comply with this Court's dictates.

Defendant's Prior Record

Juvenile Record

Petty theft; Disorderly Conduct; Criminal trespass

Adult Record

Petty theft (shoplifting)

Performance on Probation

The defendant has failed to fulfill the terms of his probation. His recent arrest and disregard of this Court's direct order banning him from entering the premises of the Publix stores are direct violations of his probation. Additionally, his failure to make any effort to enter shoplifting/theft classes or to seek employment demonstrates his lack of interest in fulfilling the terms of his probation. Understandably, the period of his probation has been extremely short but the fact that he has already involved himself in additional criminal violations is telling relative to his lack of resolve.

Recommendations

There are compelling arguments for this Court to terminate this defendant's probation and impose the terms of his prior sentence and also impose new sanctions relative to the new charges. The defendant has not demonstrated any willingness to adjust his behavior but, in light of the short passage of time, the defendant should be afforded additional time to demonstrate that he has the capacity to change his behavior. There is no evidence that the defendant engaged in any theft behavior in the present criminal action and that he acted inappropriately to being confronted by store security. Under the circumstances, the terms of his probation should be extended with new conditions added to address the behaviors which brought rise to the present criminal violations.

PSI project