State v. Mieles

Summary

The court held that a defendant adequately preserved and briefed a challenge to the legal standard governing a postsentencing standing criminal protective order. It concluded that the governing statute requires specified predicate findings, including qualifying-offense status, the statutory best-interests finding, and additional evidence not presented at sentencing. Because the trial court made none of those findings and relied only on prosecutorial representations, the court reversed and directed that the order be vacated.