State v. Phillip
Court of Appeals of Utah
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum Decision
CHRISTIANSEN, Judge:
¶1 Girato Kamillo Phillip challenges the district court’s decision to revoke his probation, arguing that it was improper to base the revocation on his conduct while he was not being supervised by Adult Probation and Parole (AP&P). He also argues that he did not willfully violate the conditions of his probation because he did not know he was on probation. Because compliance with probation conditions is not legally dependent on being supervised, and because Phillip knew or should have known he was subject to probation conditions, we affirm.
¶2 The posture…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bearden v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- State v. CandedoUtah Supreme Court · 2010
- United States v. Robert M. WarnerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- In Re YoungUtah Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.