S.W.2d 385, 386-88 (Tex.App.-Waco 1991, no pet.). In Burch, we noted that: a court has jurisdiction to revoke probation after the probationary period expires if (1) a motion to revoke is filed before the term of probation expires and (2) a capias or warrant is issued prior to the expiration of the probationary period. Once these jurisdictional requirements have been established, they must be followed by proof from the state by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) the defendant violated a term or condition of his probation; and, if due diligence is raised at the revocation hearing then, (2) due diligence was exercised to apprehend the defendant and (3) due diligence was exercised to hear the motion to revoke. See Shaw v. State, 622 S.W.2d 862, 863 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1981) (<HOLDING>). Id. at 387. The State filed the application
holding that standard for revocation of probation is preponderance of the evidence holding that the standard of proof in revocation proceedings is a preponderance of the evidence holding that the standard of proof for dischargeability actions is the preponderance of the evidence standard holding that the standard of proof for the dischargeability exceptions in 11 usc  523a is the preponderance of the evidence standard holding that the proper standard of proof is preponderance of the evidence