Opinion ID: 1219182
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Applicant's probation revocation

Text: Applicant testified in that he knew it was against the law for him to own a firearm. He argued, however, that the specific conditions of his probation did not prohibit gun ownership. [17] Evidence in the record, however, shows otherwise. In the written order placing applicant on probation, an express condition of the probation was that he abide by the standard written Conditions of Supervision of the Corrections Division. Applicant's probation officer testified that applicant was presented with and signed those general conditions of probation, which included the following as General Condition No. 10: Obey all laws, municipal, county, state, and federal. The federal gun law of 1968 prohibits any person convicted of a crime punishable by a felony the use or possession of a firearm. This discrepancy between applicant's testimony and that of his probation officer was identified in the Board's opinion in Jaffee I, a copy of which was given to applicant. Notwithstanding, applicant testified in Jaffee II that, although he did not doubt that a prohibition against the possession of firearms was a standard condition of probation, such a prohibition was not a term of his probation. The Board found that applicant's testimony in that regard is, at best, misleading, and, at worst, deceptive and untruthful. I agree. The probation order expressly imposes as a condition of probation that applicant abide by the standard written Conditions of Supervision of the Corrections Division, which expressly includes the requirement that applicant comply with all laws, including the federal law prohibiting convicted felons from possession firearms. Applicant's statement that this provision was not a term of his probation is misleading and inaccurate. Another express provision of applicant's Order Suspending Sentence is that applicant conduct himself as a law-abiding citizen. During his probation revocation hearing, applicant admitted, as he has to the Board, that he did not so conduct himself as a law-abiding citizen, and applicant does not contest the lawfulness of the revocation of his probation. I agree with the Board that applicant's testimony about the terms of his criminal probation was, at best, misleading and, at worst, deceptive and untruthful.