DeMillard v. State

KITE, Justice.

[T1] The district court denied Mr. DeMil-lard's requests to modify the terms of his probation or to discharge him from probation. He claims on appeal that his constitutional rights were violated because he was not present during the hearing on his motions. We conclude that the hearing was not part of his criminal prosecution and he was afforded all of the process he was due under the circumstances. Consequently, no error occurred when the district court did not require his presence.

[12] We affirm.

ISSUE

[13] Mr. DeMillard presents the following issue on appeal:

Was Appellant denied…