MOGG v. State
Ind: Court of Appeals, 2009
Here is a summary of the case:
On January 16, 2007 Appellant pled guilty to operating a vehicle while intoxicated. Her jail time was suspended pending successful completion of a probationary term. One of the conditions of probation was that she consume no alcohol. On August 27, 2007, the state alleged that Appellant violated her probation by consuming alcohol.
Upon admission of the violation, the trial court extended Appelant’s probation and imposed an addition condition, which was the continuous wearing of the SCRAM bracelet.
In January, 2008 Appellant was placed on a SCRAM II bracelet, an updated version. March 17, 2008 Appellant admitted violating her probation as part of an agreement that extended her probation by four months and required her to remain on the SCRAM II.
On June 20, 2008 the State filed a new information of probation violation, alleging violation by consuming alcohol “as evidenced positive SCRAM events.” On November 1, 2008 the State filed another information of probation violation alleging Appellant consumed alcohol four days prior, as evidenced by positive readings for alcohol while on SCRAM.
The trial court held an evidentiary hearing on both information’s and revoked Appellants probation on the finding that she had consumed alcohol. Appellate continued to deny consuming any alcohol.
Appellant appealed on whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence of Appellant’s alcohol consumption generated by the SCRAM system. An additional question before the court was whether there was sufficient evidence to support the revocation of Appellant’s probation.
The Court of Appeals concluded the trial court did not abuse their discretion based on the uncontroverted expert testimony and evidence before them in determining the SCRAM readings as evidence of alcohol consumption. Finding that they were sufficiently reliable to be admissible as for purposes of a probation revocation.
Comments on this entry are closed.