Opinion ID: 2227492
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Propriety of ordering counseling.

Text: The Court of Appeals properly resolved this issue: We agree with the State that the trial court was not required to specify sexual abuse treatment as the specific type of counseling. The probation conditions are controlled by statute, which provides that the court may require a person to undergo medical or psychiatric treatment and to satisfy conditions reasonably related to the person's rehabilitation. [ Ind. Code §] XX-XX-X-X. Thus, the appropriate counseling for Gilfillen's rehabilitation would be a sexual abuse treatment program. This situation is analogous to drug treatment as a condition of probation. This court has held that a court is not required to specify the particulars of a drug treatment program. Slip opinion, p. 7. See also White v. State, 1990, Ind., 560 N.E.2d 45, 47, where this Court stated, The judge sets the `conditions of probation' and the probation officer supervises and assists the defendant in implementing and carrying out those conditions... . Those specifics are not conditions of probation but are details in the implementation and execution of the order. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in ordering counseling, and the Probation Department properly specified sexual abuse therapy.