I apologize for the long post (especially if I'm retreading old ground) also Im not a lawyer, so forgive me if I'm misreading these statutes, but it unfortunately looks like not only will Nick get away with the shit talking Aaron (even if the HRO sticks) but he's probably already been given "the talk" about doing his CS and it's relation to his time in jail (hence his PO talking with him recently)
So statute 609.135 is on the stay of imposition/execution of sentences. It's second definition is what's of interest to us
2)(the court) may place the defendant on probation with or without supervision and on the terms the court prescribes, including intermediate sanctions when practicable. The court may order the supervision to be under the probation officer of the court, or, if there is none and the conviction is for a felony or gross misdemeanor, by the commissioner of corrections, or in any case by some other suitable and consenting person. Unless the court directs otherwise, state parole and probation agents and probation officers may impose community work service or probation violation sanctions, consistent with section 243.05, subdivision 1, or sections 244.197 to 244.199.
So Nick's community service is part of his probation, at least partially, so lets get into them.
243.05 covers the definition and limitations of the powers of "the Commissioner of Corrections" which seems to be the general term for the Parole/probation system in MN. The first couple parts of subdivision 1 are irrelevant to us, either being about murder convictions from the 1960s and 1980s, establishing how new rules are added, or explicitly saying PO's written word is enough for LEOs to arrest a probie.
However we have section G
(g) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 1b, in considering applications for conditional release or discharge, the commissioner is not required to hear oral argument from any attorney or other person not connected with an adult correctional facility of the Department of Corrections in favor of or against the parole or release of any inmates. The commissioner may institute inquiries by correspondence, taking testimony, or otherwise, as to the previous history, physical or mental condition, and character of the inmate and, to that end, has the authority to require the attendance of the chief executive officer of any state adult correctional facility and the production of the records of these facilities, and to compel the attendance of witnesses. The commissioner is authorized to administer oaths to witnesses for these purposes.
Nothing super interesting,(1b only applies to 1st degree murder charges) just saying the commissioner doesn't have to hear lawyer or "witness" testimony outside of Correction department related individuals, only using layperson witnesses for the defendant's physical, and mental condition.
The real (imo) hype killer is section h
(h) Before revoking a nonviolent controlled substance offender's parole or probation based on a technical violation, when the offender does not present a risk to the public and the offender is amenable to continued supervision in the community, a parole or probation agent must identify community options to address and correct the violation including, but not limited to, inpatient substance use disorder treatment. If a probation or parole agent determines that community options are appropriate and available in the state, the agent must seek to restructure the offender's terms of release to incorporate those options. If an offender on probation stipulates in writing to restructure the terms of release, a probation agent must forward a report to the district court containing:
(1) the specific nature of the technical violation of probation;
(2) the recommended restructure to the terms of probation; and
(3) a copy of the offender's signed stipulation indicating that the offender consents to the restructuring of probation.
(i) The recommended restructuring of probation becomes effective when confirmed by a judge. The order of the court is proof of confirmation and amends the terms of the sentence imposed by the court under section 609.135.
again NAL but this reads like the state wants to offer "redemptive correction" instead of jail if they think you aren't a threat (or a trust-fund rich kid gas huffer). So Nick will, if he hasn't already (I think he had the irl sit-down with his PO when he was AWOL from the Internet) be forced to play repentant probie, swear to and sign a restructuring of his probation terms, then go home.
Section I ties into H, basically saying the the restructuring has to follow 609.135.
Section J says if a non-violent controlled substance offender has parole/probation revoked, LEO who arrest the offender have to try and place them in a local jail first, so regardless of if it's Stearns, Kandy Yoshi, or elsewhere that Nick actually catches that probation revoking charge from, he's going down to Kandy-Yo county with all hasin and Gloyd Ford.
Section K defines the important terms for the statutes that I feel would be nice for us to see.
(k) For purposes of paragraphs (h) to (k):
(1) "nonviolent controlled substance offender" means a person who meets the criteria described under section
244.0513, subdivision 2, clauses (1), (2), and (5); and
(2) "technical violation" means any violation of a court order of probation or a condition of parole, except an allegation of a subsequent criminal act that is alleged in a formal complaint, citation, or petition
244.197-244.199 cover the initiation of a sanctions conference, basically the meeting to talk about a violation and how/what they are going to do about it. Only thing of particular interest is technically Nick doesn't/didn't have to attend the conference, as 244.199 covers the defendant's right to opt out of attending. That meeting would be where Nick's PO, or I guess "the county's PO" if it's not the same, would request his apprehension from a judge.
Like I said I think Nick will get off with the violation of his probation if it's only the potential HRO violation, but either way I saw someone posted AI stuff so I wanted to look into at least state level statutes.
Links:
609.135,
243.05,
244.197,
244.198 244.199
if you think Nick won't go to jail in August, and 
if you think he will. (Or rate me dumb or whatever, it's not like I can control you, I'm not your dad.)
