SECOND DI VI SI ON

RI CKM A N, C. J.

, M ILLER, P. J.

, and HODGES, J.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s

June 28, 2022



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 2 A0 07 6 . GRIM ES v . THE STATE.

R I C K M A N , Ch i ef J u d ge.

In t h i s p ro b at i o n rev ocat i o n act i o n

, we g ran t ed Sam m y Gri m es ’ s ap p l i cat i o n

fo r d i s cret i on ary ap p eal i n o rd er t o rev i ew t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er i n wh i ch i t rev o k ed

t w o ye ars o f hi s p ro b at io n. Gri m es arg ues t h at t he rev ocat i o n was b as ed u p o n

i n ad m is s i b le h ears ay ev i d en ce an d v i o l at ed h i s d u e p ro ces s ri g ht t o co n fro n t h i s

accu s ers

. Becau s e we co n cl u d e t h at cert ai n hears ay ev id en ce was erro n eo u s l y

ad m i t t ed an d t h at t h e ad m i s s i b l e ev i d en ce p res en t ed at t h e h eari ng was i n su ffi ci en t

t o s u p p o rt t h e rev o cat i o n , we rev ers e. 1

1 W e no t e t hat jeo p ard y d o es n o t at t ach t o a pro b at i o n rev o cat i o n heari ng s o as t o b ar

fu t u re p ro ceed i n gs b as e d u po n t he s am e co n d u ct

. See U. S. Co n s t., Art

. I, Sec. I, Par.

XVIII; S mi th v. St a t e

, 1 71 G a

. A p p

. 2 7 9

, 2 82 (3 1 9 SE2 d 1 13 ) (1 9 8 4) (“ [A] p ro b at i o n

rev o cat i o n h eari n g i s s i m i l ar t o a p rel i m i n ary h eari n g, an d jeo p ard y do es n o t at t ach a t a

p rel i m i n ary h eari n g .”). Cf. Ed va l s o n v. S t a t e

, 3 3 9 Ga. Ap p

. 3 4 8

, 3 5 1 (7 9 3 SE2 d 5 4 5 )A t ri al co u rt m ay rev o k e a p ro b at ed s en t en ce i f “ th e ev i d en ce p ro d u ced at t h e

r e v o cat i o n h eari n g es tab l i s hes b y a p rep o n d eran ce of t he ev i den ce t h e v i o l at i o n o r

v i o l at i o n s o f t h e co nd i t i o n s o f p ro b at i o n al leg ed .” Ca l d wel l v. S t a t e

, 3 2 7 Ga. Ap p.

4 7 1

, 4 72 (7 5 8 SE2 d 3 25 ) (2 01 4 ) (p un ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ) (ci ti n g OCGA § 4 2 -8 -3 4

. 1

(b )). Th e t ri al co u rt s i t s as t h e t ri er o f fact i n rev o cat i o n p ro ceed i ng s . See Ga d d i s v.

S t a t e

, 3 1 0 Ga. Ap p

. 1 8 9

, 18 9 -1 9 0 (1 ) (7 12 SE2 d 5 9 9) (2 0 11 ). “ Th i s Co u rt wi l l n ot

i n t erfere wi t h a rev o cat i o n un les s t h ere h as b een a m an i fes t ab u s e o f d i s cret i o n o n t h e

p art o f t he t ri al co u rt .” Ca l d wel l

, 3 2 7 Ga. Ap p

. at 4 72 (p u n ct uat i o n om i t t ed ). Th u s

,

we wi l l affi rm a pro bat i o n rev o cat i o n ju d g m en t i f th e r eco rd i n cl ud es “ s o m e

co m p et en t ev i d en ce t o s h o w t h at th e d efen d an t v i o l at ed t h e t erm s o f h is p ro bat i o n in

t h e s p eci fi c m an n er ch arg ed .” Id

. T h i s Co u rt rev i ews q u es t i o n s o f l aw, h o wev er, d e

n o v o . Id

.

Th e ev i d en ce ad d u ced at t h e p ro b at i o n rev o cat io n heari n g s h o ws t hat i n 2 0 1 9,

Gri m es p l ed g u il t y t o ag g rav at ed as s au lt

, s eco nd -d eg r e e ars o n

, an d s eco n d-d eg ree

cri m i n al d am ag e t o p ro p ert y

, an d t h e t ri al co u rt i m p o s ed a to t al s en t en ce of o n e y ear

i n p ri s on , t o b e fo ll o wed b y 1 1 y ears o n p ro bat i o n . As rel ev an t h ere, t he co n d i t i on s

(2 0 1 6 ) ( “ [ J] eo p ard y d o es no t at t ach

, an d t he co n s t i t u t i o n al p ro hi bi t i o n ag ai n s t d o u b l e

jeo p ard y can h av e n o ap p l i cat i o n, u n t i l a defen d an t i s p ut t o t ri al b efo re t h e t ri er o f fact s

, wh et h er t he t ri er b e a ju ry o r a ju dg e.”) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at io n o m i tt ed ).

2o f hi s p ro b at i o n p ro h i b i t ed Gri m es fro m : (i ) v i o lat i ng an y cri m i n al l a w s ; an d

(i i) en g ag i n g i n v io l en t co n t act wi t h t wo n am ed v i ct i m s

.

In Feb ru ary 2 0 2 0

, t h e St at e p et it i o n ed t o rev o k e Grim e s’ s pr oba ti o n o n g ro u nd s

t h at h e co m

m i t t ed t h e o ffen s es o f ag g rav at ed as s au lt an d t erro ri s t i c t h reat s wh en h e

ap p eared at t h e ho u s e o f th e t wo n a m e d v ict i m s an d t h reat en ed t o k i l l an d / o r h u rt

t h em

. Du ri ng th e en s u in g p ro b at i on rev o cat io n h eari n g

, t h e v i ct i m s d i d no t ap p ear

an d d id n o t t es ti fy

. Rat h er, t h e St at e ten d ered a reco rd i n g of t h e 91 1 cal l m ad e b y o n e

o f t h e n am ed v i ct im s wh o s t at ed t h at h er “ b oy fri en d,” w ho s he di d n o t i d en t i fy

, 2 was

at h er h o m e an d was t h reat en i n g t o k i l l ev ery o n e i n t h e h o u s e. Th e v ict i m m en t i o n ed

t h at t h ere were s ev eral ch i ld ren in t h e ho m e, an d t h at t h e p erp et rat o r was h i g h o r

d ru n k an d act in g “ crazy .”

Th e p o l i ce offi cer wh o res p o n d ed t o th e cal l t es t i fi ed at t h e h eari n g

. Sh e s t at ed

t h at i n J an u ary 2 0 21

, s h e was d i s p at ch ed t o M it ch el l’ s h om e fo l l o wi ng a 9 1 1 cal l an d

arri v ed ap pro x i m at el y ei g h t m i n u t es l at er. Ov er G ri m es ’ s ob ject i o ns

, t h e o ffi cer

fu rt her t es t i fi ed t h at wh en s h e arri ved at t h e v i ct i m ’ s h o m e, t h e v i ct i m to l d h er t h at

2 At s o m e p o in t d u ri n g t he 9 1 1 cal l

, t h e v i ct i m d id i d en ti fy Gri m es as t h e p erp et rat o r.

Th e t ri al co u rt

, h o wev er, d i d no t co n s i d er th i s p o r t i o n o f t h e 9 1 1 cal l du ri n g th e h eari n g

b ecau se i t g ran t ed Gri m es ’ s ob ject i o n an d ex cl u d ed ev ery t h i n g on t h e reco rd in g aft er t h e

1 : 1 3 m in u te m ark o n t h e g ro u n d s t hat i t was t es t i m o n i al hears ay

. Th e St at e d o es n o t

ch al l en g e t h at ru li n g

.

3Gri m es “ b eat o n t h e g arag e,” en tered her ho m e, b ran d i s hed a s t eak k n i fe, an d

t h reat en ed t o k i l l h er an d h er b ro t h er (wh o was t h e seco n d n am ed v i ct i m wi t h wh o m

Gri m es was t o h av e n o v io l en t co n t act ). Gri m es w as n o t at t h e h o u s e wh en t he o ffi cer

arri v ed

.

Gri m es o bject ed t o t h i s tes t i m on y as h ears ay an d o n t h e gro u n d t hat i t v i o l at ed

h i s d ue p ro ces s ri gh t t o co n fro n t t h e wi t n es s es ag ai n s t h i m

. Th e t ri al co u rt o v erru l ed

Gri m es ’ s o b

j ect i o n s u p o n co n cl u d i n g t h at th e v i ct i m ’ s s t a t em en t s w ere ad m i s s i b l e

u n d er t h e “ p res en t s en se i m p res s i o n ” ex cep t i o n t o t h e h ears ay ru l e.

Th i s C o u rt g ran ted Gri m es ’ s ap pl i cat io n fo r i n terl o cu t o ry ap p eal i n o rd er to

d et erm i n e wh et her th e h ears ay ev i d en ce was erro n eo u s l y ad m i t t ed an d

, if s o

, wh et h er

t h e ev i d en ce aga inst Gri m es was i n su ffi ci en t to rev ok e h i s pro b at i o n

. Aft er an s weri n g

b o t h o f t h es e q u es t i on s i n t h e affi rm at i ve, we are co n s t rai n e d t o r e v e rs e t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s rev o cat i on

.

Th e Co n fro n t at i o n Cl au s e o f t h e Si x t h Am en d m en t

, m ad e ap p l ic a b l e t o t h e

St at es t h ro u g h t h e Fo u rt een th A m en d m en t

, gu aran t ees a cri m i n al d efen d an t t h e ri g ht

“ t o b e co n fro n ted wi t h t he wi t n es s es ag ai n s t h im .” Un d er t h e Co n fro n t at i o n Cl au s e,

t es t i m o ni al h ears ay i s ad m i ss i b l e ag ai n s t a cri m in al d efen d an t o n l y wh en th e wi t n es s

i s u n av ai lab l e to t es t ify

, an d th e d efen d an t h ad a p ri o r op p ort u n it y to cro s s -ex am i n e

4t h e wi t n es s

. Cr a wf o r d v. W as h in g t o n

, 5 4 1 U. S. 36

, 53 (III) (A), 5 9 (IV), 6 8 (V) (C)

(1 2 4 SCt 1 35 4 , 1 5 8 LE2 d 1 7 7 ) (2 0 0 4 ).

Nev ert h el es s

, i n a p ro b at i o n rev o cat i o n h eari n g

, t h e ri gh t t o co n fro n t ad v ers e

wi t n es s es ari s es n o t u nd er th e Co n fro n t at i o n Cl au s e, b u t r a t h e r a s a m at ter o f d u e

p ro ces s

, wh i ch i s l es s s t ri ng en t t h an t h e c o n f r o n t at i o n g u aran t ee i n a cri m i n al t ri al

.

See W i l l i a ms v. La wr en ce

, 2 73 Ga. 2 9 5

, 2 9 8 (5 4 0 SE2 d 5 99 ) (2 0 01 ) (“ Ev i d en ce t h at

wo u l d v i o l at e t h e S i x t h Am en dm en t o r wo u l d b e i n ad m i s s ib l e h ears ay i f p res en t ed

at a cri m i n al t ri al m ay

, i n p ro p er ci rcu m s tan ces

, b e co n s i d ered at a p aro l e o r p ro b at i o n

rev o cat i on h eari n g w ithout viola ting t he d ue pr oc e s s ri g h t t o co n fro n t at i o n .”) (ci t at i o n

an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). “ [T] h e m i n i m u m req u irem en ts o f d u e p ro ces s i n cl u d e t h e

ri gh t t o co n fro n t an d cro ss -ex am i n e ad v ers e wi t n es s es ( u n l e s s t h e h ea r in g o f f i cer

s p eci f i ca ll y f i n d s g o o d ca u s e f

o r n o t a l l o wi n g t h e co n

f r o n t a t io n ).” (Ci tat i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m i t te d ; em

p h as i s i n o ri g i n al

. ) W

a r e v. S t a t e

, 2 8 9 Ga. Ap p

. 8 6 0

, 8 6 2

(6 5 8 SE2 d 4 4 1 ) (2 0 0 8 ) (p h y s i cal p reced en t o n l y ); s ee W i ll i ams , 2 7 3 Ga. at 2 9 8

. To

t h at en d

, “ [s ] om e s p eci fi c o b ject i on o r i n v o cat i o n o f t h e d u e p r o c e s s ri g h t o f

co n fro n tat io n [i s ] n eces s ary i n o rd er t o t ri g g er co n s i d erat i o n o f t h e s eco n d ary i s s u e

o f wh et h er t h ere w as g o o d cau s e fo r n ot al l o w i n g t he co n fro n tat i o n

, wh i ch u s u al l y

req u i res ex am i nat i o n o f b ot h t h e reas o n s fo r t he St at e’ s fai l u re t o p ro d u ce t h e

5d ecl aran t an d t h e rel i ab i l i t y o f t h e h ears ay ev i d en ce.” W i l l i a ms

, 2 73 Ga. at 2 9 8

. Th e

b u rd en o f p ro v i ng t h at h ears ay ev i d e n c e b e a r s a s u ffi ci en t i n d i ci a o f rel i ab i l i t y to

wi t h s t an d d u e p ro ces s s cru t i n y l i e s w i t h th e St at e. Cf. Mi ll er v. S t a t e

, 26 6 Ga. 8 5 0,

8 5 3 (4 7 2 SE2 d 7 4 ) (1 9 9 6 ) (reco g n i zi n g th at t h e p ro p o n en t o f h ears ay ev i d en ce i n t h e

face o f a Co nfro n t at i o n Cl au s e o b ject i o n h as t h e b u rd en o f p ro vi n g t h a t i t b ears

s u ffi ci en t i n d i ci a o f rel i ab i li t y t o wi t h s t an d s cru t i n y ).

Here, Gri m es i n v o k ed t h ro u g h ob ject io n h i s d ue p ro ces s ri g h t t o co n fro n t t h e

wi t n e s s e s a g ai n s t h i m

. Nev ert h el es s

, t he t ri al co u rt d i d n o t ex am i n e

— n o r d i d t h e

St at e p res en t

— an y ev i d en ce t o ex pl ai n wh y t h e v i ct im s d i d n ot at t en d t he h eari n g.

M o reo v er, t h e St at e fai led t o m eet i t s bu rd en o f p ro v i n g t h at t h e h e a rs ay

ev i d e n c e w a s rel i ab le. D u ri n g t h e h eari n g

, t h e St at e as s ert ed

, an d t h e t ri al co u rt

ag re e d

, t h a t th e res p o nd i n g o ffi cer’ s t es t i m o n y fel l wi t h i n t h e p res en t s en s e

i m p res s i o n ex cep t i o n t o t h e g en eral ru l e ex cl u d i n g h ears ay

, t hu s p res u m ab l y

ren d eri n g t h e t es t i m o n y rel i ab l e. 3 See OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 0 3 (1 ); s ee al s o Ha g en v. S t a t e

,

1 6 9 Ga. Ap p. 2 5 9

, 2 5 9 (2 ) (3 1 2 SE2 d 3 57 ) (1 9 8 3 ) (“ Th e e x c e p t io n s t o t h e ru l e

3 Th e Geo rg i a Ru l es o f Ev i d en ce ap p l y i n p ro b at i on rev ocat i o n h eari ng s

. See OCGA

§ 2 4 -1 -2 (b ).

6ex cl u d i n g hears ay are ex cep t i o n s becau s e, fo r o ne reas o n o r an o t h er, rem ark s wh i ch

fal l u nd er t h at p en u m

b ra are d eem ed rel i ab l e.”).

A pres en t s en s e im

p res s i o n i s “ [a] s t at em en t d es cri b i ng o r ex p l ai ni n g an ev en t

o r co n d it i o n m a d e w h i l e t he d ecl aran t was p ercei v i n g t h e ev en t o r co n d i t i o n o r

i m m ed i at el y th ereaft er.” OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 0 3 (1 ); s ee Va r n er v. S ta t e

, 30 6 Ga. 7 2 6

, 7 3 1

(2 ) (b ) (i i ) (8 32 SE2 d 7 9 2 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (“ To b e ad m i t t ed un d e r t h i s ex cep t i o n

, t h e

s t at em en t m

u s t d es cri b e o r ex p l ai n an ev en t o r co n d i ti o n t hat i s p ers o nal l y wi t n es s ed

b y t h e d ecl aran t an d i s es s en t ial l y co n t em p o ran eo u s to t h e s t at em en t.”) (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ). “ T h e u n d erl y i ng t h eo ry o f [t h e p res en t s en s e im p res s i o n ] ex cep t i o n i s t h at

t h e s u b s tan t i al co n t em

p oran ei t y o f t he ev en t an d t h e s t at em en t n eg at e t h e l i k el i h o o d

o f d e l i b e r at e o r co n s ci o u s m i s rep res en t at io n .” (Ci t at io n an d p un ct u at io n o m i t t ed .)

Owen s v. S t a t e

, 3 2 9 Ga. Ap p

. 4 5 5

, 4 58 (1 ) (b ) (7 6 5 SE2 d 6 5 3) (2 0 1 4). In d eed

, “ [t ] h e

i d ea o f i m

m ed i acy l i e s at t h e h eart o f t h e ex cep ti on

, t hu s

, th e t i m e req u i rem en t

u n d erl y i n g t h e ex cep t i o n is s t ri ct b ecau s e i t i s t h e fact o r t h at as s u res t ru st wo rt h i n es s .”

(Em p h as i s i n ori g i n al ; ci t at i o n s a n d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) U.S

. v. Gr een

, 5 5 6 F.3 d

1 5 1 , 1 5 5 -5 6 (3 d . Ci r. 2 0 0 9 ). 4

4 O CGA § 2 4 -8 -8 0 3 ( 1 ) was en act ed i n 2 0 11 as p art o f t h e new Ev i d en ce Co d e,

m u ch o f wh i ch was b o rro wed fro m t h e Fed eral Ru l es o f E v i d en ce. “ [W ] h ere t h e n ew

Geo rg i a ru les m i rro r t h e i r f e d e r a l co u n t erp art s

, i t is cl ear t h at t h e G en eral As s em b l y

7Here, al t h o u gh t he v i ct i m ’ s s t at em en t t o t h e 9 1 1 o p erat o r was m ad e wh i l e t h e

v i ct i m “ was p ercei vi n g t h e ev en t o r co n d i ti o n o r i m m ed i at e l y t h e reaft er,” h er l at er

s t at em en t g i v en to t h e res p o n d i n g o ffi cer was n o t s u ffi ci en t l y co n t em p o ran eo u s wi th

t h e ev en t t o co m e wi th in t h e p res en t s en s e i m p res s io n ex cep ti o n to th e h ears ay ru l e. 5

See Un i ted S t a t es v. Ba t es

, 9 60 F.3 d 1 2 7 8

, 1 2 9 1 (II) (C) (1 1t h Ci r. 2 0 20 ) (“ W h i l e t h e

s t at em en t s [ap pel l an t ] m ad e o n t he 9 1 1 cal l were m ad e wh i l e o r i m m ed i at el y aft er

[h e] p ercei v ed t h e ev en t

, t he lat er s tat em en t to [a fed eral ag en t at t h e s cen e] i s s i m p l y

t o o f a r r e m o v ed t o b e a p res en t s en s e i m p res si on .”) (p u n ct uat i on o m it t ed ); U.S

. v.

Ma n f r e

, 36 8 F.3 d 8 32

, 8 40 (II) (B) (8 t h Ci r. 2 0 04 ) (h o l d i ng t hat st at em en t was n o t a

p res en t s en s e i m

pres s i o n w h en

, “ [a] t t h e v ery l eas t

, t h ere was an i n terv en i n g wal k o r

d ri v e” b et ween t h e ev en t an d t h e t i m e o f t h e s t at em en t ). Cf. Leg r ee v. S t a t e

, 3 4 4 Ga.

Ap p . 7 9 3 , 7 9 8 (1 ) (8 12 SE2 d 6 8 ) (2 0 1 8) (h ol d i n g t h at th e t ri al co urt ’ s ad m i s s i o n o f

s t at em en t s b y t h e u n av ai lab l e vi ct i m an d h er m i n o r ch i l d t o t h e r e s p o n d in g o ffi cer

i n fri n g ed o n ap pel l an t ’ s ri gh t s u n d er t h e Co n fro n t at i o n Cl au s e, b ut t h e v i ct i m ’ s

i n t en d ed fo r Geo rg i a co u rt s t o l o o k t o th e fed eral r u l e s an d h o w fed eral ap p el l at e co u rt s

h av e i n t erp ret ed th o s e ru l es fo r g u i d an ce.” (Ci t at i o n an d pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Jen ki n s v.

S t a t e , 3 0 3 Ga. 3 1 4

, 3 1 7 (1 ) (8 1 2 SE2 d 2 38 ) (2 0 1 8 ).

5 Th e St at e do es n o t as s ert

, an d t h e r e c o rd i s n o t s u ffi ci en t t o es t ab l is h

, t h at t h e

t es t i m o n y fel l wi t h in an y

o t h er ex cep t i o n t o t h e h ears ay ru l e.

8s t at em en t s d u ri n g th e 9 1 1 cal l

, m ad e wh il e t h e in ci den t was on g oi n g, we r e p res en t

s en s e i m p res s i o n s ). Co m

p are Owen s

, 3 2 9 Ga. Ap p

. at 4 5 9 (1 ) (b ) (h o l di n g t h at t wo

s e p arat e s t at em en t s m ad e t o t h e 9 1 1 o p erat o r were ad m i ss i b l e as p res en t s en s e

i m p res s i o n s b ecau s e “ [t ] h e en t i ret y o f b o th cal l s

. . . t o ok p l ace wh i l e t h e v ict i m was

p ercei v i ng t he d an g er p os ed t o h i m b y [ap p el l an t] ”).

Becau s e Gri m es s p eci fi cal l y i n v o k ed h i s d ue p ro ces s ri g h t of co n fro n t at i o n,

an d b ecau s e t h e t ri al co u rt fai l ed t o ex am in e t h e reas o n s fo r t h e S t a t e ’s fai l u re to

p ro d uce t h e v i ct i m s an d t o en s u re t he rel i ab i l i t y o f t h e h ears ay ev i d en ce, t h e

res p o n d in g o ffi cer’ s t es t i m o n y was erro n eo u s l y ad m i t ted

. See W a r e

, 28 9 G a. Ap p

. at

8 6 3 ; s ee al s o Un i t ed S t a t e s v. Bo d y

, 7 9 1 Fed

. Ap p x

. 8 0 7

, 8 0 9 (III) (A) (1 1 t h Ci r.

2 0 1 9 ) (h o l di n g t h e d i s t ri ct co u rt co m m i t t ed rev ers ib l e erro r b y rel y i n g o n h ears ay

d u ri n g ap p el l an t ’ s s u p erv i s ed rel eas e rev o cat i on h eari n g b ecau s e “ [t ] h e g o v ern m en t

d i d n o t o ffer an y ex p l an at i o n fo r i t s fai l u re t o p res en t [i n fo rm i n g ] wi tn es s es

. . ., n o r

d i d t h e co u rt m ak e an y d et erm i n at i o n reg ard i n g t h e rel i ab i l i t y o f t h e h ears ay ev i d en ce

i n t ro du ced t h ro u g h t h e d et ect i v e”); U.S

. v. Fr a z i er

, 2 6 F.3 d 1 1 0

, 1 1 4 (III) (A) (1 1 th

Ci r. 1 9 94 ). 6

6 We n o t e g en eral ly th at t he Fed eral Ru l es o f Ev id en ce d o no t ap p l y t o fe d e r a l

rev o cat i o n p ro ceed i n g s . See Fr a zi er , 2 6 F3 d at 1 1 2 -1 1 3 (III) (A).

9Fu rt her, th e co m p et en t ev i d en ce

— wh i ch co ns i s ted s o l el y o f th e ad m i t t ed

p o rt i on o f t h e 9 11 cal l

— fai led t o i den t i fy G ri m es as th e perp et rat o r, an d was t hu s

i n s u ffi ci en t t o es t ab l is h b y a p rep on d eran ce o f t h e ev i d en ce t h at Gri m es v i o l at ed a

co n di t i o n o f h is p ro b at i o n

. See W a r e

, 2 8 9 Ga. Ap p

. at 8 6 3 ; Hu nt v. St a t e

, 3 2 7 Ga.

Ap p

. 6 9 2

, 6 9 3 -6 9 4 (1 ) (7 61 SE2 d 9 9 ) (2 0 1 4 ); s ee al s o Hen l ey v. S t a te

, 3 1 7 G a. Ap p.

7 7 6

, 7 7 7 -7 7 8 (1 ) (a) (7 3 2 SE2 d 8 3 6 ) (2 0 1 2 ) (d eci ded un d e r t h e fo rm er Ev i d en ce

Co d e). Co n s eq u en t ly , we are co n s t rai n ed t o rev ers e.

Ju d g men t r ever sed . Mi l l er

, P. J., a nd

Ho dg es , J., co n cu r

.

10