Pittsburg County Sheriff Chris Morris, who was recently reelected despite pending charges for felony embezzlement and bribery of a public official, has agreed to remain suspended for the next six months and forego the term in office he just won.

Filed Friday, July 12, the order agreement concludes a removal- from-office action requested by the Pittsburg County Board of Commissioners in May, days after Morris was first charged.

Morris, who won 56.68 percent of the vote against opponent Randy Hass in the June 18 Republican primary election, allegedly falsified records pertaining to a Polaris utility vehicle that he owned before it was resold to the Pittsburg County Sheriff ’s Office at a higher price.

A second felony charge was added after accusations surfaced stating that Morris asked for sheriff vehicle repairs to be up-charged so he could obtain a discount on his personal repairs. Morris was also accused of accepting free repairs on his personal vehicle in exchange for bringing sheriff ’s office vehicles to the McAlester business.

The agreed order states that Morris is to remain suspended until resigning at the end of his current term or Jan. 2, 2025, whichever date falls later. Morris’ agreement not to assume office for a third term will trigger a special election to determine Pittsburg County’s next sheriff.

The order states that the agreement makes it “unnecessary to continue litigating this removal action,” although it clarifies Morris is not admitting to wrongdoing and that the removal request will only be dismissed upon his eventual resignation.

Cherokee County District Attorney Jack Thorp, who was assigned the Morris case following the local district attorney’s recusal, said the criminal complaints against the sheriff are ongoing.

“The order resolves the removal trial scheduled for July 22 and delivers some clarity to the citizens of Pittsburg County,” Thorp said in a statement to NonDoc. “We expect to continue working toward a resolution in the criminal case. Sheriff Morris is presumed innocent of the filed charges.”

Friday’s filing comes after Morris had fought to stay in office for two months.

His attorney, Jeremy Beaver, filed a motion June 5 to dismiss the accusation for removal. Morris pleaded not guilty in the dismissal case, stating that he “voluntarily and with counsel sat for an interview with Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation agents and answered their questions as honestly as possible.”

Before voting on the request for removal, the Pittsburg County Commissioners were short one board member owing to District 2 Commissioner Kevin Smith’s resignation in February. The day after Morris was charged with felony embezzlement in May, the board held a special meeting and appointed Sandra Crenshaw as an interim commissioner for District 2 until a successor could be elected in place of Smith, whose wife, Pam, is the county’s court clerk.

The June 18 primary determined the District 2 seat between the two Republicans on the ballot, Mike Haynes and Don Chapman. Haynes won the seat with 73.93 percent of the vote, and he was appointed by Gov. Kevin Stitt on July 1 to fill the seat immediately in accordance with state statute.

But Morris’ June 5 motion argued that the Pittsburg County Board of Commissioners’ decision to appoint Crenshaw as an interim member was illegal and invalidated the petition against the embattled sheriff. The motion referred to Crenshaw as a “pretend county commissioner.”

Under the same Oklahoma statute, if a county commissioner vacancy occurs during an election year for the office, no special election shall be held. Instead, the winner of the regular election cycle shall be appointed by the governor “as soon as practical after the applicable election.”

“How ironic, that the Board of County Commissioners would vote to accuse and attempt to remove the duly elected sheriff of Pittsburg County for alleged wrongdoing while the board itself was acting illegally by appointing its members in violation of Oklahoma law just five days earlier,” Beaver wrote in the June 5 motion.

In addition to asserting Crenshaw’s illegal appointment, the motion claimed the board meeting held to decide action against Morris violated the Oklahoma Open Meeting Act “by allowing a non-member of the board to vote and participate in executive session.”

Thorp, the prosecutor, filed his response to the motion acknowledging that Crenshaw’s appointment to the board was unnecessary given that only a majority vote is needed when bringing an accusation for removal.

“Here, both commissioners Selman and Rogers voted to bring the accusation,” Thorp wrote. “Certainly, the defendant is not claiming either Commissioner Selman or Commissioner Rogers did not have authority to vote as to the accusation.”

Thorp’s response also noted that the actions of a “de facto officer will hold valid so far as they involve the interest of the public and third persons.”