Opinion ID: 3054874
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Revocation of Work Release and Probation

Text: 4 Case: 12-15230 Date Filed: 08/13/2013 Page: 5 of 14 On January 12, 2010, the state court held a hearing on the delinquency report. Plaintiff Flournoy appeared pro se at the hearing. Defendant Duffie testified that although Flournoy understood going into the work release program that he was required to have a job, he said he could not work and “declined to go get one.” When the state court asked Flournoy whether he wanted to cross-examine Duffie, Flournoy said no. After the state court placed Flournoy under oath, he testified that he was disabled and could not work. The state court explained to Flournoy that if he could not work, he could not be in the work release program. The state court found that Flournoy had violated the terms and conditions of his probation because he failed to obtain or maintain employment and revoked his probation. Flournoy was removed from the work release program and was committed to the custody of the Alabama Department of Corrections (“ADOC”).