To Jail or not to Jail

Judge Crutchley addressed procedural matters, including disqualification claims and scheduling a hearing for a motion to revoke release.
Highlights
1. Judge Disqualification and Assignment
• Judge Raymond D. Crutchley addressed Ronald Thompson's objection regarding his assignment to the case, citing alleged prior disqualification, but no evidence or order supporting this claim was presented during the hearing.
• Judge Crutchley clarified that he was unaware of any disqualification order involving him and requested Mr. Thompson to provide specific documentation if such an order exists.
• The judge emphasized that resolving the disqualification issue would be prioritized before proceeding with other matters, but no immediate resolution was reached during the session.
2. Motion to Revoke Release
• The court acknowledged the State's motion to revoke Ronald Thompson's release, citing alleged violations of a no-contact order.
• Judge Crutchley informed Mr. Thompson that the motion was being served during the hearing and confirmed that Thompson had received a copy of the motion.
• The judge clarified that no decisions regarding the motion or release conditions would be made during this session, and a contested hearing would be scheduled to address the matter.
3. Scheduling of Contested Hearing
• Judge Crutchley proposed scheduling a contested hearing approximately 30 days out to allow time to resolve the judge assignment issue and ensure proper handling of the motion to revoke release.
• The State, represented by Kelsey Gorman, requested a shorter timeline due to concerns about ongoing violations of the no-contact order and the proximity of the parties involved.
• The court ultimately scheduled the contested hearing for September 23rd at 3 p.m., ensuring both parties had adequate notice and time to prepare.
4. Clarification of Release Conditions and Jurisdiction
• Ronald Thompson raised concerns about the conditional release law, suggesting that only the judge who initially set the release conditions could hear the motion to revoke release.
• Judge Crutchley refuted this claim, stating that the law does not restrict the motion to the original judge, but deferred addressing this legal interpretation to the contested hearing.
• The judge confirmed that Mr. Thompson's current release conditions would remain unchanged until the contested hearing.
5. Allegations of Shared Driveway and No-Contact Order Violations
• The State alleged ongoing violations of the no-contact order, including claims that the parties shared a driveway, which heightened concerns about proximity and potential conflicts.
• Ronald Thompson disputed the shared driveway claim, asserting sole ownership of the property, but Judge Crutchley deferred litigating these details to the contested hearing.
• The judge emphasized that the hearing would focus solely on the motion to revoke release and related evidence, ensuring a fair and focused proceeding.

Next steps
1. Review and confirm if there is any existing order disqualifying Judge Crutchley from presiding over the case: Ronald Thompson
2. Prepare for the contested hearing on the motion to revoke release scheduled for September 23rd at 3 p.m., including presenting witnesses if necessary: Kelsey Gorman
3. Review the motion to show cause why release should not be revoked, which was served during the hearing: Ronald Thompson