Court Opinion

ID: 9674474
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:29:37.930095+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:27.773175
License: Public Domain

WALKER, Presiding Judge
(dissenting).
I must dissent.
*831I agree that probation is one of the great advances in the administration of criminal justice, but, in my view, the trial judge in this case did not abuse his discretion under the rules laid down in Stiller v. State. In addition I do not find that Stiller or the statutes require a trial judge to set out in writing his reasons for denying or granting probation. Ordinarily this is not required in discretionary matters. I cannot say that the action of the trial judge here was capricious, arbitrary or palpably abusive of his discretion. An appellant claiming an abuse of discretion has the burden of proving that contention. I do not think he has sustained that burden.
I would affirm the trial judge’s denial of probation.