Opinion ID: 6497289
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Residential Condition

Text: ¶ 32. Finally, defendant argues that the court erred in finding that he violated a condition prohibiting him from residing where he had access to computers or other devices with access to the internet because he was never charged with violating this condition. The State concedes that this was error but argues that it was harmless because the court would have revoked defendant’s probation based on his other violations. We disagree that the error was harmless because the violation adjudication may have affected the court’s decision regarding sentencing. “We cannot know what sentence the court might have imposed if it had found fewer probation violations.” State v. Blaise, 2012 VT 2, ¶ 27, 191 Vt. 565, 38 A.3d 1167 (mem.). We therefore conclude that it is necessary to remand the case for resentencing. See id. The decision below is affirmed except for the trial court’s finding that defendant violated the residency condition. That finding is reversed and the matter is remanded for the court to reconsider its disposition in light of this opinion. FOR THE COURT: