On July 30, the city filed a motion to reverse the criminal charge against the convicted landlord "upon further review of the records of the municipal court it appears that there is a deficiency in the charging instrument." Today, the county court ordered the appeal and case dismissed (below).
Did the city attorney choose to drop it instead of being embarrassed in court?
Before the trial, the prosecuted landlords told Prosecutor Wyatt that there was no possible basis in the law for charging landlords after the tenants refused to allow inspections.
Why couldn't Wyatt or his superiors figure that out even after non-lawyers explained it to them??? Anyone who can read the ordinance can figure it out. (Of course, the jury didn't get to see that part of the ordinance.)
Did the city attorney choose to drop it instead of being embarrassed in court?
Before the trial, the prosecuted landlords told Prosecutor Wyatt that there was no possible basis in the law for charging landlords after the tenants refused to allow inspections.
Why couldn't Wyatt or his superiors figure that out even after non-lawyers explained it to them??? Anyone who can read the ordinance can figure it out. (Of course, the jury didn't get to see that part of the ordinance.)
RSS Feed
