The Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the Blount County Circuit Court's decision to revoke Juan Manuel Coronado, II's probation for a rape conviction, ordering him to serve his original eight-year sentence in confinement. Initially indicted for child rape, Coronado pled guilty to an amended charge of rape in January 2006, receiving a split sentence of one year in jail and the remainder on probation. Following a probation violation in August 2007, he was briefly confined before returning to probation. In May 2010, another revocation hearing revealed multiple violations, including public intoxication, not registering as a sex offender, and failing to pay court costs. Evidence presented included a positive drug test for oxycontin and admission of alcohol use. Coronado testified about his background, employment challenges post-violation, and compliance efforts, but the court ultimately upheld the revocation based on the stipulated violations.
The appellant tested positive for oxycontin after taking a pill from another resident at the Budget Inn for a headache, acknowledging the risky nature of his choice. Following the positive test, his probation officer indicated a potential violation warrant. On Super Bowl Sunday, the appellant consumed two beers at Applebee's and, believing he might be returning to jail, drove to a bar in Knoxville after his curfew. Although he claimed he was not intoxicated, he admitted to being buzzed, which impaired his judgment. After becoming ill while driving, he called for police assistance, did not admit to drinking, and passed field sobriety tests. However, he later disclosed his alcohol consumption to his probation officer.
The appellant, who had been on probation for several years, expressed a desire to marry and promised to adhere to probation rules if given another chance. His girlfriend testified to his honesty and claimed he did not drink or do drugs. The trial court found sufficient evidence of probation violations, including alcohol use, not residing at his registered address, failing to pay court costs, and testing positive for oxycontin, thus revoking his probation and ordering him to serve his original sentence.
On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court's decision, noting that revocation of probation is at the trial court's discretion and is upheld unless there's no substantial evidence of a violation. The court reiterated that a probationer is not entitled to a second probation or alternative sentencing after a violation.
