Tipton v. State

I respectfully dissent because I believe that the evidence was not sufficient to support revocation of the appellant’s suspended sentences. Despite the majority’s statement to the contrary, I think it clear that the trial court based its decision to revoke solely on the fact that the appellant had been charged with a crime. The trial court’s order was based upon an express finding that “Testimony was given by Inv. Phillip R. Quinn regarding case no. CR93-93 in which the defendant was charged with Criminal Mischief in the First Degree.” The order was based upon this finding. Although the…