Court Opinion

ID: 9744042
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:52:32.517964+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:46.355388
License: Public Domain

SULLIVAN, Judge,
dissenting.
It is apparent from the record that the sentencing court assessed the evidence under an erroneous standard, i.e., that the defendant bore the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that he had successfully completed the substance abuse program. We do not and cannot know what decision the trial court might have made had it applied the correct standard, as enunciated by the majority here.1
In my view, we do not have the prerogative to review the evidence and determine that the State carried the burden of establishing that Hopper left the program prematurely and without authorization from the hospital authority.
I would reverse and remand for reconsideration of the evidence in light of the applicable standard concerning the burden of proof.

. In this respect, I note that the hospital was unable or unwilling to document the circumstances surrounding the September 18 departure of Hopper from the hospital.