State v. Hinzman

Citations

• 2024 Ohio 2452

Syllabus

Evid.R. 103(C)(3) parole revocation substantial evidence due process. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing witnesses to testify about a surveillance video not entered into evidence as the rules of evidence do not apply to proceedings revoking probation in accordance with Evid.R. 103(C)(3). The trial court did not err in finding the appellant to be a parole violator as there is substantial evidence that the appellant violated his parole by smoking contraband. The trial court did not violate the appellant's due process rights.