# Scamardo v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · October 30, 1974 · 517 S.W.2d 293

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9683990

## Case

- **Full name:** Pete Thomas SCAMARDO, Appellant, v. the STATE of Texas, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** October 30, 1974
- **Citations:** 517 S.W.2d 293; 1974 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1924
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Onion
- **Judges:** Dally, Onion
- **Cited by:** 323 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9683990

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that, because probation-revocation hearings are not criminal trials, the State’s burden of proof in a *379 probation-revocation hearing is only by a preponderance of the evidence
- holding that, because probation-revocation hearings are not criminal trials, the State=s burden of proof in a probation-revocation hearing is only by a preponderance of the evidence

## Opinion text

ONION, Presiding Judge
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I concur in the result reached, but dissent to that portion of the opinion declaring the burden of proof in a revocation of probation proceeding to be “by a prepon *299 derance of the evidence.” I remain convinced that the proper burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt” for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Kelly v. State, 483 S.W.2d 467, 473 (Tex.Cr.App.1972).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9683990. Public record. Not legal advice.