Jailed former St. Louis Sheriff Alfred Montgomery is not done trying to get his badge back. On Friday, his attorneys asked a judge to reopen the civil case that removed him from office, urging the court to review the record from the Missouri attorney general’s removal suit and either order a new hearing or throw out the earlier decision.
In the motion filed Friday, Montgomery’s legal team argues that the removal proceeding was riddled with legal errors and that the court’s findings should not stand, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. It is the latest procedural volley as his civil fight over the sheriff’s office and his separate criminal cases move forward on different court calendars.
Why the state sought his removal
The Missouri attorney general’s office sued to remove Montgomery from the elected sheriff’s post, accusing him of misconduct that included improperly detaining staff, using deputies for personal errands and failing to carry out required inmate transports. The Attorney General’s Office has said that conduct amounted to willful neglect and abuse of duty, serious enough under state law to cost him his job.
Federal charges and custody
On a separate track, Montgomery faces federal criminal charges tied to incidents at the city jail. The U.S. Attorney’s Office announced an indictment last year accusing him of deprivation of rights under color of law. Later filings, as described in national coverage, added allegations of witness tampering and retaliation, and said he was held in custody during parts of the case. AP News has detailed his arrest and detention status.
Defense's bid for a do‑over
Montgomery’s attorneys say the removal case itself was abusive and effectively undid the will of voters who elected him, and they are pressing the court to reopen the record so disputed facts can be revisited. Coverage by St. Louis Public Radio notes the defense position that the evidence presented fell short of the high legal bar required to strip an elected official of office.
What happens next
The judge will now decide whether to grant the motion, and any ruling could be appealed, which would stretch out a legal battle that has already cost Montgomery his job. Local outlets report that Montgomery still faces upcoming court dates in his criminal cases, and another hearing in related litigation is expected in late March, according to St. Louis Magazine.
Legal implications
Granting a new hearing in a quo warranto removal case would be unusual and would keep open broader questions about when official misconduct crosses the line into forfeiting an elected office. Materials from the Attorney General Hanaway’s office describe quo warranto as a tool for removing officials who willfully neglect or abuse their duties, which sits at the center of the dispute now back before the court.
