Galletly Trial Set for Jan. 6
District Judge Robert Haney set a trial date of Jan. 6, 2006 for Grove City Manager Bill Galletly, after denying a motion to dismiss charges of splitting of contracts.
Galletly is accused of two counts of splitting of contracts, a misdemeanor, to avoid requirements of the Oklahoma Competitive Bidding Act of 1974.
In District Court Thursday, Galletly's attorney Jack Gordon Jr. of Claremore, argued for dismissal because the statute as written by the legislature is punishable only by rendering the split contract void, and omits any reference to criminal sanction. Gordon argued that the statute must be read as written, not "presumed that something else must be there." He said if the legislature thought it had erred, it had more than 30 years to correct the statute and had not done so, even though revisions were made in 2000.
Judge Haney said it was not logical that there would be criminal punishment for county and state employees for violation of the statute, but none for city employees. "It does not make logical sense to this court so the motion to demurrer is denied," said Haney.
He added that he would assist in any way he could to get the State Court of Criminal Appeals to hear the case promptly.
Gordon said his defense would be the same on appeal or at trial "because I am right." The statute is what it says, not what is it interpreted to be.
The two splitting of contracts charges refer to the "White Building Project" east of Grove, now home of Rocket Gaming, Inc., and the "Grove City Hall Remodel Project."
The statute reads that the only punishment for violation of this section is voiding of the contracts. Gordon said the Court of Criminal Appeals usually does not hear cases until after the trial is held but he would push for an early hearing in any case.
Galletly remains free on an "own recognizance bond." Charges were filed by District Attorney Eddie Wyant Aug. 19.
Galletly is accused of two counts of splitting of contracts, a misdemeanor, to avoid requirements of the Oklahoma Competitive Bidding Act of 1974.
In District Court Thursday, Galletly's attorney Jack Gordon Jr. of Claremore, argued for dismissal because the statute as written by the legislature is punishable only by rendering the split contract void, and omits any reference to criminal sanction. Gordon argued that the statute must be read as written, not "presumed that something else must be there." He said if the legislature thought it had erred, it had more than 30 years to correct the statute and had not done so, even though revisions were made in 2000.
Judge Haney said it was not logical that there would be criminal punishment for county and state employees for violation of the statute, but none for city employees. "It does not make logical sense to this court so the motion to demurrer is denied," said Haney.
He added that he would assist in any way he could to get the State Court of Criminal Appeals to hear the case promptly.
Gordon said his defense would be the same on appeal or at trial "because I am right." The statute is what it says, not what is it interpreted to be.
The two splitting of contracts charges refer to the "White Building Project" east of Grove, now home of Rocket Gaming, Inc., and the "Grove City Hall Remodel Project."
The statute reads that the only punishment for violation of this section is voiding of the contracts. Gordon said the Court of Criminal Appeals usually does not hear cases until after the trial is held but he would push for an early hearing in any case.
Galletly remains free on an "own recognizance bond." Charges were filed by District Attorney Eddie Wyant Aug. 19.
posted by Editor | 2:32 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home