SB 139 concerning violation of probation and home detention passed the House and is on its way back to the Senate with (I think) minor amendments. The bill specifies that a violation of a condition of probation can be sanctioned in one or more of the following ways:
(1) Continue the person on probation, with or without modifying or enlarging the conditions.
(2) Extend the person’s probationary period for not more than one (1) year beyond the original probationary period.
(3) Order execution of all or part of the sentence that was suspended at the time of initial sentencing.
Current law seems to limit the court to picking one and only one of those options.
The House amendment has to do with allowing a community corrections program in one county to monitor an offender in an adjacent county.
This is likely related to a recent Indiana Supreme Court case, Prewitt v. State. Looks like the legislature is just eliminating the “or” between sections 2 & 3 that the Supremes deemed meaningless anyway…
“We do not perceive the word “or†in this statute as reflecting a legislative decision to put revocation decisions in a straightjacket. Accordingly, we hold that Indiana Code § 35-38-2-3(g) permits judges to sentence offenders using any one of or any combination of the enumerated options. This serves the public interest by giving judges the ability to order sentences they deem to be most effective and appropriate for individual defendants who violate probation.”