By Joe Johnson
A Superior Court judge this week ruled that prosecutors from the Western Judicial Circuit District Attorney’s office were in contempt of court for not being prepared for a hearing.
In making the ruling, Chief Judge Lisa Lott noted that she had only a day before admonished the DA’s office for not being prepared for an unrelated court proceeding.
The contempt ruling came Thursday, after Lott convened a hearing on a prosecution petition to revoke the probation of an offender who in 2021 had been convicted of aggravated assault in a family violence case.
The petition alleged 10 ways in which the defendant had violated his probation.
After witnesses for the prosecution testified about two of the allegations, the judge wanted to know how they planned to address the other eight allegations.
In her ruling, Lott described a prosecution team in disarray. She said that assistant district attorneys Elizabeth Sutton and Michael Ody were “unable to explain why they were not calling witnesses who were subpoenaed and who were in the hallway, why they seemed to be unaware of who those witnesses were, why they did not know whether witnesses had even been subpoenaed, why they seemed to be unaware of the other criminal allegations the State had made against Defendant, and significantly, why they were not prepared to address most of the petition, after being given notice to this hearing since June 2024.”
Lott noted that because of the prosecution’s petition, the defendant had been incarcerated since May 14.
The judge indicated that she gave prosecutors the opportunity to explain why they should not be held in contempt, at which time they apologized and “insisted they will try to learn how to properly fulfill their obligations.”
Lott then stated in her ruling: “Although this Court recognizes counsels’ apologies as being sincere, their responses do not repair this Court’s finding. In this professional moment, counsel for the State has disregarded their professional obligation to be properly prepared for the hearing…after having been reminded by this Court on several occasions, and as recently as yesterday, to ensure their compliance with this Court’s direction.”
In conclusion, Lott stated that she “therefore finds counsel for the State…to be in contempt of court for their failure to be properly prepared to address matters that they have petitioned, and specifically, to be properly prepared to address” their request to revoke probation.
The judge concluded by stating the attorneys could “purge their contempt” by jointly donating $150 to a charity of their choice within 10 days of her order.