State v. Williams
884 P.2d 743
Kan.App.,1994.

State filed motion and order to show cause why probationer who had been sentenced to five years' probation should not have probation revoked, and filed amended motion and order after expiration of term. The District Court, Shawnee County, James M. MacNish, Jr., J., revoked probation, and probationer appealed. The Court of Appeals, Larson, J., held that: (1) trial court had jurisdiction to revoke probation where revocation proceedings were instituted prior to expiration of probation term, notwithstanding fact that revocation order was issued after probation had expired; (2) amendments to requests for probation revocation should be considered where initial motion to revoke is filed before expiration of probation term and amended allegations were unknown or could not have been known when timely filing is made as long as there is no unnecessary delay and actual hearing is promptly held; and (3) delay in excess of nine months before filing amended allegations known at time of timely filing and subsequent delay of 18 months before hearing was held was sufficiently unreasonable as to require reversal of order revoking probation.
Reversed.

**744 *142 Syllabus by the Court

1. A trial court has jurisdiction to revoke probation if proceedings are instituted prior to expiration of the probation term, even though the order revoking probation is issued after the probation term has expired.
2. Amendments to requests for probation revocation should be considered where the initial motion to revoke probation is filed before the expiration of the probation term, provided the amended allegations were unknown or could not reasonably have been known when a timely filing is made, as long as there is no unnecessary delay before filing of the amended allegations, and the actual revocation hearing is promptly held.
3. Under the facts of this case, a delay in excess of 9 months before filing amended allegations known at the time of the timely filing of a motion to revoke probation and a subsequent delay in excess of 18 months before any hearing was held are sufficiently unreasonable to require reversal of an order revoking probation.