Cited by

A district court has “broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

This appeal follows.1 DECISION A district court “has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” - 50 (Minn. 1980).

“The [district] court has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

In May 2025, after an additional relapse, failure to submit to testing, and failure to meet with his 1Before revoking a defendant’s probation, a district court must (1) designate the specific condition violated, (2) “find that the violation was intentional or inexcusable, ” and “find that the need for confinement outweighs policies favoring probation.”

A district court has “broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

A district court has “broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

2 (explaining that, before a district court revokes probation, the court must (1) “designate the specific condition or conditions 7 Lee’s fourth probation violation and that Lee had “consistently found himself before the [c]ourt from the time of sentencing, every six to eight months, on violations.

“The [district] court has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation,” and we will only reverse “if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

“The [district] court has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” State v. Austin , -50 (Minn. 1980).

“The [district] court has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

4 DECISION “The [district] court has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

“The [district] court has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” - 50 (Minn. 1980).

A district court has “broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

(identifying three factors that must be considered in probation-revocation proceedings); -69 (Minn. 2003) (holding that Austin factors must be considered in EJJ probation- revocation proceedings).

d 246, 250 (Minn. 1980) .

Before a district court can revoke probation, it must (1) “designate the specific condition or conditions that were violated”; (2) “find that the violation was intentional or inexcusable”; and (3) “find that [the] need for confinement outweighs the policies favoring probation.” (the Austin factors).

d 246, 249–50 (Minn. 1980).

A district court has “broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

The district court has broad discretion in its decision to revoke probation, which will only be reversed “if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

The district court “has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” , 249-50 (Minn. 1980); (affirming the district court’s revocation decision for a single drug-use violation), aff’d

DECISION District courts have “broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

To revoke probation, a district court must find that (1) the individual violated a specific probation condition, (2) “the violation was intentional or inexcusable ,” and (3) the “need for [the individual’s] confinement outweighs the policies favoring probation.”

Counsel asked the district court to consider that Perry’s unsuccessful discharge from treatment did not 1

“The [district] court has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” State v. Austin , -50 (Minn. 1980).

Minn. Stat. § 609.14, subd.

ANALYSIS “The district court has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discretion.” -50 (Minn. 1980).

DECISION A district court may revoke an offender’s probation if it finds that (1) the defendant violated a condition of probation; (2) “the violation was intentional or inexcusable” ; and (3) “the need for confinement outweighs the policies favoring probation.”

revoking EJJ probation and executing a previously stayed adult sentence, the district court must (1) identify the specific condition of probation that was violated, (2) “find that the violation was intentional or inexcusable,” and (3) “find that the need for confinement outweighs the policies favoring probation.” 768 (Minn. 2003) () (holding that “the Austin factors must be considered” in the EJJ probation revocation context); see also Minn. R. Juv.

“The [district] court has broad discretion in determining if there is sufficient evidence to revoke probation and should be reversed only if there is a clear abuse of that discre tion.” State v. Austin , -50 (Minn. 1980).