By Byron Spires,
Sheriff Morris Young’s petition to stop a hearing to “show cause” why he should not be held in contempt of court for allowing furloughts to inmates has been denied by the 1st District Court of Appeal (DCA).
According to DCA documents, the sheriff’s position is that the bond orders at issue are not sufficiently “clear and definite” to place the sheriff on notice of what conduct is prohibited.
The state argued that first appearances, where bonds and other requirements are set by a judge, were in fact a court order.
The sheriff asserts the document states that dismissal is required because he cannot be held in indirect criminal contempt of court because the bond orders do not specifically state that furloughs are not allowed.
In response the three panel DCA judges wrote: “Whether the court orders at issue are sufficiently clear, and that the sheriff intentionally violated them, are issues of proof for another day after the trial court has held a full evidentiary hearing and otherwise complied with due process. As such, we affirm the trial court’s order only to the extent it finds a basis for the State to pursue its case, and remand to that court for further proceedings.”
All three judges concurred with the decision. It will be up to Senior Judge Julian Collins as to when the hearing will be held.