Lizotte v. State

We hold that the State proved by a preponderance of the evidence that appellant substantially, willfully violated Condition (5) of his probation orders by failing to live and remain at liberty without violating any law by committing the offense of burglary. Appellant concedes the evidence supported a finding that he violated Special Condition (16) by failing to perform the required public service hours.

The state concedes the trial judge erred in finding appellant violated condition (1), failing to report to the probation officer. Further, the trial judge did not make an oral pronouncement as…