Derek Wilczynski of Blanco Wilczynski won an appeal of a conviction arising out of an alleged probation violation. Mr. Wilczynski’s client had been convicted of malicious use of a telecommunications device and using a computer to commit a crime (as the result of a poorly worded joke made during a discussion in a closed Facebook group). As a result of the conviction, Mr. Wilczynski’s client was put on probation for two years and ordered not to “possess” guns. The client’s wife had guns that she owned. Just as the client’s probationary period was to end, the couple’s son stole the guns. The client reported this theft to the probation officer.

The probation officer violated the client’s probation, necessitating a hearing on the matter, on the grounds that the client “wasn’t to be around” guns. Despite testimony that (a) the client and his wife checked with their attorney as to whether she could keep the guns – and were informed that they could, provided the client did not know where the guns were kept and did not have reasonable access to the guns, (b) the client did not know whether his wife kept her guns, sold her guns, or got rid of her guns, (c) the wife kept the guns in a locked gun safe hidden from her husband, and (c) the son stole the guns without the wife’s knowledge, the trial court found Mr. Wilczynski’s client guilty of a probation violation.

Mr. Wilczynski appealed the ruling to the Oakland County Circuit Court, where the circuit court judge heard the appeal and ruled that the trial court did not make a finding sufficient to support a conviction for a probation violation. As a result, the conviction has been vacated.