State of Tennessee v. Shenessa L. Sokolosky (Dissenting)

Case Number
M2022-00873-CCA-R3-CD

I respectfully dissent. This case comes to us on a probation revocation where, even taking the State’s evidence at face value, the proof does not establish a violation. The trial court found absconsion and failure to pay fines and costs, but the record supports neither finding. And because the probation warrant was already admitted and considered, a remand to supply a “good cause” hearsay finding cannot cure the problem. Whether the hearsay is excluded or admitted again, the result is the same: the State’s proof remains insufficient to sustain the revocation.

Authoring Judge
Judge Tom Greenholtz
Originating Judge
Judge Brody Kane
Date Filed
Download PDF Version