Were Smith's due process rights violated when his probation officer added a condition of probation without a hearing and counsel?

Question

In 1995 Smith pled guilty to second degree burglary and third degree sexual assault in one case and to a violation of probation in the second case, based on the underlying offenses of being possession of narcotics with intent to sell and interfering with an officer. He was sentenced to a minimum term of four years imprisonment, followed by five years probation. The original conditions of the defendant's probation included no contact with the victim, compliance with a standing criminal restraining order, substance abuse evaluation, and "treatment as deemed appropriate." While Smith was incarcerated, his probation officer modified his probation to include participation in a sex offender treatment program and Smith signed a copy of the amended condition. After release, Smith's probation was revoked and he was reincarcerated for twice showing up late for his sex offender therapy sessions.
What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

No
Over the past seventy years, the United States Supreme Court has expanded the protections afforded a defendant regarding the right to counsel and the right to a court hearing in criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court also has established certain minimum procedural protections for individuals on parole and probation, including a hearing before parole or probation is revoked. Smith