defendant admits violation in Georgia

2012He testified that he had received information from several confidential informants that an individual named Todd Anderson was selling drugs out of his lawnmower repair shop; the investigator had also heard, from sources not made clear by the record, that White was frequently at the shop; the investigator was not told, however, that White was a part of any drug operation.3 The investigator ran a criminal records check on 1 See OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (b) (“A court may not revoke any part of any probated or suspended sentence unless the defendant admits the violation as alleged or unless the evidence p

2012He testified that he had received information from several confidential informants that an individual named Todd Anderson was selling drugs out of his lawnmower repair shop; the investigator had also heard, from sources not made clear by the record, that White was frequently at the shop; the investigator was not told, however, that White was a part of any drug operation.3 The investigator ran a criminal records check on 1 See OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (b) (“A court may not revoke any part of any probated or suspended sentence unless the defendant admits the violation as alleged or unless the evidence p

2012Generally, “[t]his court will not interfere with a revocation unless there has been a manifest abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court.” (Citation omitted.) Gray v. State, 313 Ga. App. 470, 471 ( 722 SE2d 98 ) (2011).

2012Generally, “[t]his court will not interfere with a revocation unless there has been a manifest abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court.” (Citation omitted.) Gray v. State, 313 Ga. App. 470, 471 ( 722 SE2d 98 ) (2011).

2012See OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (b) (“A court may not revoke any part of any probated or suspended sentence unless the defendant admits the violation as alleged or unless the evidence produced at the revocation hearing establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the violation or violations alleged.”); Bowen v. State, 242 Ga. App. 631, 633 ( 531 SE2d 104 ) (2000) (state has burden to show hy preponderance of evidence that a defendant violated a condition of probation).

2012See OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (b) (“A court may not revoke any part of any probated or suspended sentence unless the defendant admits the violation as alleged or unless the evidence produced at the revocation hearing establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the violation or violations alleged.”); Bowen v. State, 242 Ga. App. 631, 633 ( 531 SE2d 104 ) (2000) (state has burden to show hy preponderance of evidence that a defendant violated a condition of probation).

2012“A court may not revoke any part of any probated or suspended sentence unless the defendant admits the violation as alleged or unless the evidence produced at the revocation hearing establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the violation or violations alleged.” OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (b); see Thurmond v. State, 304 Ga. App. 587 ( 696 SE2d 516 ) (2010).

2012“A court may not revoke any part of any probated or suspended sentence unless the defendant admits the violation as alleged or unless the evidence produced at the revocation hearing establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the violation or violations alleged.” OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (b); see Thurmond v. State, 304 Ga. App. 587 ( 696 SE2d 516 ) (2010).

2026We acknowledge and appreciate the State’s candor and fidelity to the law. 2 the trial court.” Dillard v. State, 319 Ga. App. 299, 299 ( 735 SE2d 297 ) (2012) (citation modified).

2026We acknowledge and appreciate the State’s candor and fidelity to the law. 2 the trial court.” Dillard v. State, 319 Ga. App. 299, 299 ( 735 SE2d 297 ) (2012) (citation modified).

2024See OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (b) (a court may not 12 “revoke any part of any probated or suspended sentence unless the defendant admits the violation as alleged or unless the evidence produced at the revocation hearing establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the violation or violations alleged”); Evans v. State, 185 Ga. App. 805, 805 ( 355 SE2d 165 ) (1988) (applying same evidentiary standard in first offender termination and resentencing case as that standard used in other probation revocation proceedings).

2024“If there is no constitutional, statutory, or public policy prohibition against waiver, an accused may validly waive any right.” Thomas v. State, 260 Ga. 262, 263 ( 392 SE2d 520 ) (1990).

2024“If there is no constitutional, statutory, or public policy prohibition against waiver, an accused may validly waive any right.” Thomas v. State, 260 Ga. 262, 263 ( 392 SE2d 520 ) (1990).

2019OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (b) provides that a trial court “may not revoke any part of any probated or suspended sentence unless the defendant admits the violation as alleged or unless the evidence produced at the revocation hearing establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the violation or violations alleged.” “If some of the allegations regarding revocation are supported by admissible evidence, a trial court’s decision to revoke probation will be affirmed as within the court’s discretion.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Hilley v. State, 344 Ga. App. 58, 64 (4) ( 806 SE2d 280 ) (2017).

2019OCGA § 42-8-34.1 (b) provides that a trial court “may not revoke any part of any probated or suspended sentence unless the defendant admits the violation as alleged or unless the evidence produced at the revocation hearing establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the violation or violations alleged.” “If some of the allegations regarding revocation are supported by admissible evidence, a trial court’s decision to revoke probation will be affirmed as within the court’s discretion.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Hilley v. State, 344 Ga. App. 58, 64 (4) ( 806 SE2d 280 ) (2017).

2012See Brown v. State, 294 Ga. App. 1, 4 (2) ( 668 SE2d 490 ) (2008); Smith v. State, 283 Ga. App. 317, 318 ( 641 SE2d 296 ) (2007) (“Hearsay evidence has no probative value and is inadmissible in a probation revocation proceeding.

2012See Brown v. State, 294 Ga. App. 1, 4 (2) ( 668 SE2d 490 ) (2008); Smith v. State, 283 Ga. App. 317, 318 ( 641 SE2d 296 ) (2007) (“Hearsay evidence has no probative value and is inadmissible in a probation revocation proceeding.

2012See Brown v. State, 294 Ga. App. 1, 4 (2) ( 668 SE2d 490 ) (2008); Smith v. State, 283 Ga. App. 317, 318 ( 641 SE2d 296 ) (2007) (“Hearsay evidence has no probative value and is inadmissible in a probation revocation proceeding.

2012See Brown v. State, 294 Ga. App. 1, 4 (2) ( 668 SE2d 490 ) (2008); Smith v. State, 283 Ga. App. 317, 318 ( 641 SE2d 296 ) (2007) (“Hearsay evidence has no probative value and is inadmissible in a probation revocation proceeding.

2009In a probation revocation hearing, “[o]nly slight evidence is required to authorize revocation.” Clackler v. State, 130 Ga. App. 738, 739 (3) ( 204 SE2d 472 ) (1974).

2009In a probation revocation hearing, “[o]nly slight evidence is required to authorize revocation.” Clackler v. State, 130 Ga. App. 738, 739 (3) ( 204 SE2d 472 ) (1974).