139 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2026 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Woods v. Stategreen2 sentences2026First, the trial court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation actually occurred.” Heaton, 984 N.E.2d at 616 (citing Woods v. State, 892 N.E.2d 637, 640 (Ind. 2008)). 2020First, the trial court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation actually occurred.” Heaton, 984 N.E.2d at 616 (citing Woods v. State, 892 N.E.2d 637, 640 (Ind. 2008)). | 27 | 54 |
Sanders v. Stategreen2 sentences2019Sanders v. State, 825 N.E.2d 952, 955 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005), trans. denied. 2019Sanders v. State, 825 N.E.2d 952, 955 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005), trans. denied. | 7 | 10 |
Vernon v. Stategreen2 sentences2018If a violation is proven, then the Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-1414 | November 13, 2018 Page 3 of 7 trial court must determine if the violation warrants revocation of the probation.” Vernon v. State, 903 N.E.2d 533, 537 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (citations omitted), trans. denied. 2016If a violation is proven, then the trial court must determine if the violation warrants revocation of the probation.” Vernon v. State, 903 N.E.2d 533, 537 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (citation omitted), trans. denied. | 6 | 7 |
Kimberly Heaton v. State of Indianagreen2 sentences2026First, the trial court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation actually occurred.” Heaton, 984 N.E.2d at 616 (citing Woods v. State, 892 N.E.2d 637, 640 (Ind. 2008)). 2025Again, we disagree. [16] When a probation violation is alleged, the trial court engages in two functions: “[f]irst, the trial court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation actually occurred;” and “[s]econd, if a violation is found, then the trial court must determine the appropriate sanctions for the Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 24A-CR-2864 | April 17, 2025 Page 7 of 12 violation.” Heaton v. State, 984 N.E.2d 614, 616 (Ind. 2013). | 4 | 19 |
Parker v. Stategreen2 sentences2018If a violation is proven, then the trial court must determine if the violation warrants revocation of the probation.” Parker v. State, 676 N.E.2d 1083, 1085 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997). 2016Id. | 3 | 8 |
Justin S. Johnson v. State of Indianagreen2 sentences2020Id. 2017Johnson v. State, 62 N.E.3d 1224, 1229 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016). [7] Revocation is a two-step process: first, the trial court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of placement occurred, and if a violation is proven, the trial court must then determine if the violation warrants revocation. | 3 | 5 |
Beeler v. Stategreen2 sentences2014Beeler v. State, 959 N.E.2d 828, 829-30 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011). 2014Beeler v. State, 959 N.E.2d 828 , 829–30 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011). | 3 | 4 |
Cox v. Stategreen2 sentences2017Id. 2015Cox v. State, 850 N.E.2d 485, 488 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).2 First, the court must make a factual determination that a violation of probation has occurred. | 1 | 14 |
Morrissey v. Brewergreen2 sentences2012First, the court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation actually occurred .... [T]hen, the trial court must determine if the violation warrants revocation of the probation.” Woods, 892 N.E.2d at 640 (Ind.2008) (citing Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 479-80 , 92 S.Ct. 2593 , 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972)). 2012First, the court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation actually occurred .... [T]hen, the trial court must determine if the violation warrants revocation of the probation.” Woods, 892 N.E.2d at 640 (Ind.2008) (citing Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 479-80 , 92 S.Ct. 2593 , 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972)). | 1 | 8 |
Terrell v. Stategreen2 sentences2013Terrell v. State, 886 N.E.2d 98, 103 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008), trans. denied. 2009Woods, 892 N.E.2d at 640 ; Terrell, 886 N.E.2d at 101 . | 1 | 2 |
Cox v. Stategreen1 sentence2026Woods v. State, 892 N.E.2d 637, 640 (Ind. 2008); Cox v. State, 706 N.E.2d 547, 549 (Ind. 1999), reh’g denied. | 1 | 1 |
Braxton v. Stategreen1 sentence2018With respect to this initial determination, “[a] probation hearing is civil in nature,” Braxton v. State, 651 N.E.2d 268, 270 (Ind. 1995), and the State “must prove the violation by a preponderance of the evidence,” Ind. Code § 35 - 38-2-3(f). | 1 | 1 |
Paul Hardy v. State of Indianagreen1 sentence2017Johnson v. State, 62 N.E.3d 1224, 1229 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016); Hardy v. State, 975 N.E.2d 833, 835 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. James Clinton Hollandgreen1 sentence2012“However, even a probationer who admits the allegations against him must still be given an opportunity to offer mitigating evidence suggesting that the violation does not warrant revocation.” Id. (citing United States v. Holland, 850 F.2d 1048, 1051 (5th Cir.1988) (per curiam)). | 1 | 1 |
Ben-Yisrayl v. Stategreen2 sentences2009Ben-Yisrayl v. State, 729 N.E.2d 102, 105-06 (Ind. 2000). 2009Ben-Yisrayl v. State, 729 N.E.2d 102, 105-06 (Ind.2000). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lucas H. Jackson v. State of Indiana
green
2 sentences2018“First, the trial court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation actually occurred.” Id. (citing Woods v. State, 892 N.E.2d 637, 640 (Ind. 2008)). 2018“First, the trial court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation actually occurred.” Id. (citing Woods v. State, 892 N.E.2d 637, 640 (Ind. 2008)). | 7 | 2017–2018 |
Alford v. State
green
2 sentences2016Id. 2014Id. | 7 | 2012–2016 |
Derrian N. Hampton v. State of Indiana
green
2 sentences2019Id. 2019“First, the trial court makes a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation actually occurred; second, if a violation is proven, the trial court must determine if the violation warrants a revocation of the probation.” Id. | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Paul Sparks v. State of Indiana
green
2 sentences2019“First, the court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation has taken place.” Id. 2019“Second, if a violation is proven, the trial court must determine whether the violation warrants revocation of the probation.” Id. | 2 | 2017–2019 |
James Ripps v. State of Indiana
green
2 sentences2016Id. 2014Ripps, 968 N.E.2d at 326 . | 2 | 2014–2016 |
Rosa v. State
green
1 sentence2016Id. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Floyd William Treece v. State of Indiana
green
1 sentence2015Treece, 10 N.E.3d at 56 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Helton v. State
green
1 sentence2011Helton v. State, 907 N.E.2d 1020 (Ind.2009). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.