Opinion ID: 2382139
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Revocation of Probation Hearing

Text: The Superior Court has broad authority to terminate probationary sentences at any time. [6] Accordingly, this Court has held that the Superior Court may revoke a grant of probation before its actual commencement. [7] Consequently, the Superior Court had the authority to revoke Perry's deferred or unexecuted probationary sentence. Perry alleges the VOP hearing conducted by the Superior Court violated the rights afforded to him by Superior Court Criminal Rule 32.1 and the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The United States Supreme Court has held that due process does not necessitate that an indigent person be afforded the usual trial rights in a probation violation proceeding. [8] Nevertheless, Perry was entitled to a VOP hearing that comported with the minimum requirements of due process. The procedural limitation on the revocation of probation in state court proceedings is imposed by the protections of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. [9] The minimum requirements of due process at a hearing to consider a revocation of probation have been summarized as follows: (a) written notice of the claimed violations of (probation or) parole; (b) disclosure to the (probationer or) parolee of evidence against him; (c) opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documentary evidence; (d) the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses (unless the hearing officer specifically finds good cause for not allowing confrontation); (e) a `neutral and detached' hearing body such as a traditional parole board, members of which need not be judicial officers or lawyers and (f) a written statement by the factfinders as to the evidence relied on and reasons for revoking [probation or] parole. [10] Similar safeguards are reflected in Delaware Superior Court Criminal Rule 32.1, which provides: (a) Revocation of partial confinement or probation. Whenever a person is taken or held in custody on the grounds that the person has violated a condition of partial confinement or probation, the person shall be brought without unreasonable delay before a committing magistrate or a judge of Superior Court for the purpose of fixing bail and, if not released on bail, shall be afforded a prompt hearing before a judge of Superior Court on the charge of violation. The person shall be given: (A) Written notice of the alleged violation; (B) Disclosure of the evidence against the person; (C) An opportunity to appear and to present evidence in the person's own behalf; (D) The opportunity to question adverse witnesses; and (E) Notice of the person's right to retain counsel and, in cases in which fundamental fairness requires, to the assignment of counsel if the person is unable to obtain counsel. (b) Modification of partial confinement or probation. The requirements of subdivision (a) of this rule shall apply before the terms or conditions of partial confinement or probation can be modified, unless the relief to be granted to the person on partial confinement or probation upon the person's request or the court's own motion is favorable to the person, and the attorney general, after having been given notice of the proposed relief and a reasonable opportunity to object, has not objected. An extension of the term of partial confinement or probation is not favorable to the person for the purposes of this rule.