If you or a loved one is out of custody while a case is pending — on bond, probation, home detention, or work release — that freedom comes with strings attached. When someone allegedly breaks the rules, the State can ask the court to take that freedom away. That process is called a revocation. This post covers the two most common types, the standard of proof the State has to meet, and how a revocation hearing differs from a trial.
Revocation of Placement
“Placement” refers to how a person is serving a sentence or being supervised outside a jail cell — probation, home detention (GPS/electronic monitoring), community corrections, or work release. A revocation of placement is a request, usually filed by a probation officer or community corrections, asking the court to undo that placement because the person violated its conditions.
Common alleged violations include a new arrest, a failed or missed drug screen, leaving the house without permission on home detention, or simply failing to report.
Who decides: The sentencing court, not IDOC. Under Indiana Code 35-38-2-3, the court holds a hearing and decides whether a violation occurred and, if so, what to do about it — continue the person on the same terms, add conditions, or send them to serve some or all of the previously suspended sentence.
Placement is treated as a privilege, not a right. Indiana courts have repeatedly held that probation and community corrections placement is “a matter of grace,” which gives the court broad discretion once a violation is proven.
Revocation of Bond
A revocation of bond is different — it happens before a case is resolved, while someone is out on bail awaiting trial. The State (or occasionally the defendant) asks the court to revoke or change the bond, which can mean higher bail, new conditions, or being taken back into custody.
Under Indiana Code 35-33-8-5, a court can revoke bail if the State proves the person, while released:
- Threatened or intimidated a victim, witness, or juror
- Tried to conceal or destroy evidence
- Violated a condition of release
- Failed to appear in court
- Committed a new felony or Class A misdemeanor showing disregard for the court’s authority
Notably, the statute allows the court to consider credible hearsay at a bond revocation hearing — testimony about what someone else said is admissible in a way it typically would not be at trial.
The Burden of Proof
This is where revocations differ sharply from a criminal trial, and it’s one of the first things clients need to understand.
- At trial, the State must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt — the highest standard in our legal system.
- At a probation or placement revocation hearing, the State only needs to prove the violation by a preponderance of the evidence — meaning it is simply more likely than not that the violation happened. The Indiana Supreme Court confirmed this standard in Heaton v. State, and it is written directly into IC 35-38-2-3(f).
- At a bond revocation hearing, the standard is a bit higher — clear and convincing evidence — but still well below beyond a reasonable doubt.
In practice, this means the State has a much easier path to winning a revocation than to winning a conviction at trial.
Evidentiary Hearing vs. Trial
Clients often assume a revocation hearing will look and feel like a trial. It doesn’t, and the differences matter:
| Trial | Revocation Hearing | |
|---|---|---|
| Standard of proof | Beyond a reasonable doubt | Preponderance (probation/placement) or clear and convincing (bond) |
| Jury | Available for most charges | No jury — the judge decides everything |
| Rules of Evidence | Fully apply | Relaxed — Indiana Rule of Evidence 101 exempts probation and bail proceedings from most of the rules |
| Hearsay | Generally barred | Often admissible if it carries “substantial indicia of reliability” |
| What’s at stake | Guilt or innocence on the charge | Whether existing placement continues or is revoked |
Because the rules of evidence are relaxed, a probation officer can often testify about what someone else told them, and the judge alone decides how much weight to give it. This is not a loophole — it is how the law is written — but it means the fight in a revocation case is usually about reliability and context, not technical evidentiary objections.
Managing Expectations
The lower burden of proof and relaxed evidence rules mean revocation hearings are genuinely harder to win than they might sound. Clients sometimes come in expecting the same fight as a trial — cross-examination will dismantle the State’s case, evidence will get thrown out, a jury will give them the benefit of the doubt. None of that applies the same way here.
That doesn’t mean these hearings aren’t worth fighting. The State still has to prove something, the evidence still has to be reliable, and the specific violation alleged still has to be tied to an actual condition of release. But going in with a realistic understanding of the standard — and a plan built around that standard — gives a client the best chance of keeping their placement or minimizing the consequences of a violation.
This post is for general information and does not constitute legal advice. If you are facing a revocation hearing in LaPorte County, contact our office to discuss your specific situation.