State v. Stroud

“Even if the main issue in controversy has been resolved, collateral consequences may prevent the controversy from being moot under some circumstances.” Barnes v. Thompson, 159 Or App 383, 386, 977 P2d 431 (1999).

Defendant sought reversal of a judgment finding that she violated a special condition of her probation. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s finding that she had violated the special probation condition that she be evaluated by QRA. On appeal, Defendant argued that she was only required to “report for an evaluation” and comply with any programs designated by the evaluator, and because she reported, there was no violation. In response, the State argued that this appeal should be dismissed as moot and alternatively, that the trial court correctly determined that, because of Defendant’s hostility and lack of cooperation, she failed to “comply” with the evaluation by QRA, and therefore violated the special condition of probation. In response to the State’s argument that the court should dismiss the appeal as moot, Defendant argued that her claim was not moot because she would remain on probation until 2020, and there are potentially adverse legal consequences for her in future decisions the court may make with respect to that continued probation, including future probation violations. “Even if the main issue in controversy has been resolved, collateral consequences may prevent the controversy from being moot under some circumstances.” Barnes v. Thompson, 159 Or App 383, 386, 977 P2d 431 (1999). The Court of Appeals held that there was sufficient evidence in the record that Defendant ’s actions prevented the completion of the evaluation, which prompted the evaluator to file a notice of noncompliance, and, therefore, the trial court did not err in concluding that Defendant violated the special condition of her probation. Affirmed.