Sheriff Tommie Johnson III is asking a judge to decide whether Oklahoma law shifted inmate transportation duties to the jail trust and to order county commissioners to approve outside legal counsel for the sheriff’s office.
OKLAHOMA CITY — Oklahoma County Sheriff Tommie Johnson III asked a judge Friday to decide whether the Oklahoma County jail trust, rather than the sheriff’s office, is legally responsible for transporting inmates between the county jail and courthouse.
The lawsuit, filed in Oklahoma County District Court as Case No. CV-2026-1432, seeks a declaratory judgment that portions of the Oklahoma County Criminal Justice Authority’s governing document conflict with state law and an order requiring the trust to assume responsibility for inmate transportation and courthouse holding operations.
At the center of the dispute is a December 2023 memorandum of understanding under which the sheriff’s office agreed to transport detainees between the Oklahoma County Detention Center and the Oklahoma County Courthouse and provide staffing for courthouse holding facilities in exchange for payments from the jail trust. Under the agreement, the trust paid the sheriff’s office $63,912.24 per month plus overtime expenses — roughly $767,000 annually before overtime costs. The sheriff terminated the agreement in April, effective May 11. According to the lawsuit, the parties operated under the agreement from December 2023 until May 10, 2026.
The petition argues that state law transfers duties traditionally performed by sheriffs to a public trust that legally operates and manages a county jail, including services provided to people in custody. Johnson contends that inmate transportation falls within those transferred duties. The lawsuit specifically challenges provisions of the trust indenture that exclude courthouse holding facilities, temporary detention and inmate transportation from the trust’s responsibilities. The sheriff asks the court to declare those provisions void and unenforceable.
The dispute spilled into public view on May 11 when 79 detainees failed to make scheduled court appearances after a staffing arrangement between the sheriff’s office and the jail trust collapsed, forcing delays in hearings and plea proceedings and prompting emergency court intervention. An Oklahoma County judge subsequently ordered the sheriff’s office to continue transporting inmates pending resolution of the dispute.
The transportation disruption highlighted broader tensions over governance of the troubled detention center and raised concerns about the ability of the criminal justice system to keep court proceedings on schedule.
Attorney General Gentner Drummond later issued a formal opinion concluding that Oklahoma law requires county sheriffs to transport inmates to court, an interpretation also advanced by Oklahoma County District Attorney Vicki Behenna. Johnson disputes that conclusion, arguing that Oklahoma statutes shifted those duties to the public trust operating the jail.
The lawsuit also names the Board of County Commissioners as a defendant, alleging commissioners improperly refused at meetings on May 20 and May 27 to approve contracts for outside legal counsel to represent the sheriff in the litigation. Johnson argues approval of such contracts is a ministerial duty rather than a discretionary decision. County commissioners have questioned whether county funds should be used to pursue litigation against another county entity.
The lawsuit could have implications beyond inmate transportation. A ruling in Johnson’s favor could redefine how responsibilities are divided between the sheriff’s office and the public trust that operates the Oklahoma County jail. A ruling against the sheriff would reinforce the attorney general’s opinion that inmate transportation remains a statutory duty of the sheriff’s office.
The case also arrives as county officials continue debating the future of the jail trust amid ongoing financial and operational concerns at the detention center. County leaders have discussed dissolving the trust, which could ultimately return responsibility for operating the jail to the sheriff’s office.
Johnson is asking the court to declare the transportation agreement terminated, invalidate portions of the trust’s governing document and order the jail trust to assume responsibility for transporting inmates between the county jail and courthouse and for providing secured detention space and staffing at the courthouse.
