State v. Snyder

1

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

No. 114,047

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS

STATE OF KANSAS,
Appellee,

v.

JULIE SNYDER,
Appellant.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appeal from Sedgwick District Court; JAMES R. FLEETWOOD, judge. Opinion filed February 26,
2016. Affirmed.

Submitted for summary disposition pursuant to K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 21-6820(g) and (h).

Before MALONE, C.J., SCHROEDER, J., and BURGESS, S.J.

Per Curiam: Julie Snyder appeals the district court's decision to revoke her
probation and impose her underlying jail sentence. We granted Snyder's motion for
summary disposition under Supreme Court Rule 7.041A (2015 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 67).
The State filed a response in which it requests that this court affirm the district court's
decision. After reviewing the record and arguments, we affirm.

On July 14, 2014, Snyder pled guilty to one count of refusing to submit to a test to
determine the presence of alcohol or drugs. On September 11, 2014, the district court
sentenced Snyder to 12 months of postimprisonment supervision with court services after
serving 28 hours in jail followed by 2,160 hours of house arrest. The district court also
imposed a 12-month underlying jail sentence and a $1,750 fine.
2

On April 6, 2015, Snyder admitted to violating her probation by failing to report to
her probation officer on December 19, 2014, and committing a new crime—driving while
habitual violator—on February 21, 2015. Snyder's probation officer recommended that
the district court revoke Snyder's probation and impose her jail sentence, but the officer
was not opposed to transferring her probation to community corrections. The prosecutor
recommended transferring Snyder's probation to community corrections and imposing a
2-day jail sanction. Defense counsel asked the court to follow the State's
recommendations. After the district court announced that it was going to revoke Snyder's
probation and order her to serve the balance of her sentence, defense counsel asked the
court to consider modifying her sentence to 8 months. The district court declined and
ordered her to serve her original 12-month jail sentence.

On appeal, Snyder argues that the district court erred in revoking her probation
and ordering her to serve her underlying jail sentence. Snyder admits, however, that a
district court has discretion to revoke probation upon a showing that a defendant violated
the terms of his or her probation. Moreover, she acknowledges that K.S.A. 2015 Supp.
22-3716(c)(8) permits a district court to revoke probation without having previously
imposed another sanction if the offender commits a new felony or misdemeanor while on
probation.

Probation from a sentence is an act of grace by the sentencing judge, and, unless
otherwise required by law, the sentencing judge grants it as a privilege, not as a matter of
right. State v. Gary, 282 Kan. 232, 237, 144 P.3d 634 (2006). Once the State has proven a
violation of the probation conditions, revocation is within the sound discretion of the
district court. State v. Graham, 272 Kan. 2, 4, 30 P.3d 310 (2001). A judicial action
constitutes an abuse of discretion if the action is (1) arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable;
(2) based on an error of law; or (3) based on an error of fact. State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541,
550, 256 P.3d 801 (2011), cert. denied 132 S. Ct. 1594 (2012).

3

We find that the district court's decision to revoke Snyder's probation was not
arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable. It was also not based on an error of fact or law. We,
therefore, affirm the district court's decision revoking Snyder's probation and imposing
her original jail sentence.

Affirmed.