Opinion ID: 1925118
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 14

Heading: Amendment of sentence after ex parte communications and false representation to a third party

Text: Three youths were arrested for the burglary of a grocery store. The store was owned by the father of a defendant. The youths were found guilty of trespass less than larceny, and sentenced to six (6) months in the county jail. After they served twenty-eight (28) days, Judge Chinn amended their sentences, thereby releasing and placing them on two (2) years probation. Apparently, one of the youth's father had an ex parte communication with Judge Chinn which resulted in the releases. Judge Chinn did not remember talking with the father. However, when asked about a letter he wrote on one of the youth's behalf, he hesitantly remembered the conversation. Following their release, Judge Chinn wrote a letter to the youth's employer stating that there were no charges pending, and we still hope he has his job. To further complicate matters, this sentence was amended on a day when the arresting officer was not available, therefore denying him an opportunity to oppose the action.