an acknowledgment on 17 September 2003 of the monetary conditions of his second probation. Despite the subsequent modification of defendant’s second probation by the 17 November 2003 order, the monetary condition was not modified and therefore remained in full force and effect. That valid condition of probation was one of the allegations upon which the trial court revoked defendant’s second probation. Because the record explicitly demonstrates that defendant received written notification of the monetary condition, the breach of this condition was a valid basis upon which defendant’s second probation could be revoked. The breach of this one condition was sufficient grounds to revoke defendant’s second probation. See State v. Seay, 59 N.C. App. 667, 670-71, 298 S.E.2d 53, 55 (1982) (<HOLDING>), disc. review denied, 307 N.C. 701, 301 S.E.2d
holding that it is sufficient grounds to revoke a probation if only one condition of the probation is broken holding that a defendant is not entitled to credit for time served as a condition of probation holding states allegation of failure to report to probation officer was sufficient to revoke despite any showing of deficiency in the other two violations alleged in the motion to revoke holding that probation is not a sentence holding that the special needs of wisconsins probation system justified a warrantless search of a probationer by probation officers pursuant to a wisconsin regulation that allowed probation searches based on reasonable grounds