VIENNA — Maries County Sheriff Mark Morgan said questions surrounding now-former deputy Erican Sugg’s appointment, resignation and the sheriff’s office budget stem largely from misunderstandings about state statute, judicial involvement and the county’s current revenue shortfall.

Morgan addressed those issues during a Jan. 22 interview, offering a detailed explanation of how Sugg was hired, why the appointment did not receive a judge’s signature before the oath was administered, and how recent county commission decisions have affected staffing, equipment control and day-to-day operations within the sheriff’s office.

According to Morgan, Sugg applied for a deputy position and underwent the same background investigation required of any law enforcement applicant hired by the department. Morgan said the review included communications with previous law enforcement agencies and examination of Sugg’s Missouri Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) records.

“We conducted our standard background investigation, which includes pretty much everything that you would imagine,” Morgan said. “Application, criminal history, credit issues, POST check, and we send requests to prior agencies for any internal investigations or substantiated complaints.”

Morgan said responses from prior agencies and POST records raised no issues that would have disqualified Sugg from service.

“There was an allegation put on there, but ultimately no action had ever been taken against his license,” Morgan said. “His license was never suspended. No disciplinary action.”

Morgan is speaking on a recent case in POST concerning allegations against Sugg from a former co-worker during his first tenure at Maries County as a deputy.

The original complaint was filed on Oct. 20, 2022, after the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) completed an investigation into allegations of misconduct that occurred while Sugg was employed with the Maries County Sheriff’s Office. The investigation was conducted under then-Attorney General Andrew Bailey and forwarded to the Missouri Department of Public Safety (DPS), which in turn sought a formal disciplinary review through the state’s Administrative Hearing Commission (AHC).

On Oct. 22, 2025, DPS, through the AGO, voluntarily dismissed its complaint against Sugg without prejudice.

Morgan said those findings during the hiring process were consistent with what the sheriff’s office requires for any lateral hire and that nothing in the background check process prohibited Sugg from serving as a Maries County deputy.

Morgan said that research led him to review Missouri statutes and consult with the Missouri Sheriffs’ Association and neighboring sheriffs on deputy appointments.

“If you talk to the Missouri Sheriffs’ Association and their attorneys, there’s no requirement to get a judge’s appointment,” Morgan said. “The sheriff can swear him in. I don’t have to have a judge’s approval.”

Morgan said seeking judicial signatures has historically been the way appointments were handled in Maries County but emphasized that it is not mandated by statute.

“One of the biggest things I run into is, ‘this is the way we’ve always done things,’” Morgan said. “But that doesn’t always line up with what the statute actually says.”

Morgan said he believes some of the confusion surrounding the appointment stems from long-standing local practice being mistaken for legal requirement.

Morgan said he did not act unilaterally or hastily in moving forward.

“I research these things very clearly before I make any kind of decision,” Morgan said. “I’ve called the Sheriffs’ Association. I’ve talked to neighboring sheriffs. I don’t just knee-jerk this stuff.”

Another question that was answered was why an Osage County notary stamped the document that was sent to POST instead of someone from Maries County.

Morgan said the commissioning process stalled when the circuit clerk’s office personnel were unavailable after-hours, prompting him to ask 911 Director Nicole Bexten to notarize the document Morgan sent to POST, dated Dec. 30, 2025, to notify them of Sugg’s employment as a deputy for the county. Bexten is a notary public that just so happens to hold her commission through Osage County.

Morgan said that she was available to do the notarizing and that was the only reason she was asked. Morgan further said that he didn’t believe the document had to be notarized at all but wanted to have it done just in case.

Sugg later resigned on Jan. 21 while on administrative leave related to a separate alleged criminal matter that did not originate during his time with the Maries County Sheriff’s Office, but in Belle.

Morgan said Sugg was formally notified of his right to a due process hearing, which had been scheduled.

“He resigned before the due process hearing,” Morgan said. “Under the circumstances, I think it was the right thing to do.”

Morgan said the sheriff’s office followed statutory procedures by placing Sugg on administrative leave and scheduling a hearing, but that Sugg’s resignation made further internal proceedings unnecessary.

Morgan declined to comment on body camera footage tied to the alleged incident, adding that the matter is now before the courts.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to go on the record right now,” Morgan said. “We’re going to allow the courts to make their decision.”

Morgan also addressed public concerns about why Sugg received a summons rather than being arrested and booked into the jail facility, a question that has circulated widely in the community.

According to the probable cause statement issued on Jan. 2 by Belle Marshal Jerry Coborn, a warrant was requested; however, a summons was instead issued to Sugg by mail on Jan. 14 by 25th Judicial Circuit Judge Kerry G. Rowden.

“That is completely up to the courts,” Morgan said. “We don’t get any say on whether the court issues a warrant or a summons.”

Morgan said law enforcement agencies can make recommendations in probable cause statements, but final decisions rest with the judicial system.

“We don’t have any say in that matter,” Morgan said.

Morgan said disagreements with the Maries County Commission extend beyond the Sugg situation and reflect broader differences over statutory authority, communication and separation of powers between elected offices.

Morgan said his approach since taking office has been to rely on statutory language and legal interpretation rather than informal precedent.

“When I have a question, I look at the statute,” Morgan said. “And when the statute is confusing, I call somebody smarter than me, usually with a law degree.”

Morgan said tension has developed when decisions are made without consulting his office, particularly when those decisions affect vehicles, equipment and assets used by deputies to carry out law enforcement duties.

“It doesn’t inspire a lot of trust when those kinds of decisions are made and nobody even tells me,” Morgan said.

Morgan said his concern is not who technically owns county assets but whether safeguards exist to prevent actions that could interfere with the sheriff’s statutory responsibilities.

“If they want all the titles in the county’s name, I don’t really care,” Morgan said, refering to the commission’s recent retitling of all department equipment to Maries County. “What I care about is checks and balances.”

Morgan said that without those safeguards, future commission actions could impede the sheriff’s ability to operate.

“If someone decided to sell patrol vehicles or equipment, that would directly impact my ability to execute the duties of my office,” Morgan said.

Morgan noted that elected offices change over time, which makes those safeguards important.

“None of us are guaranteed tomorrow,” Morgan said. “Commissioners get rotated out. People resign.”

Morgan said improved communication could prevent many of the current conflicts.

“I’m in the same building,” Morgan said. “They can text me.”

Morgan said he has attempted to foster transparency by providing detailed inventories and documentation to the commission.

“I gave them the most accurate and up-to-date inventory the sheriff’s office has probably ever provided,” Morgan said.

He said he has encouraged commissioners to review expenditures line by line if they have concerns.

“Pull the receipts out,” Morgan said. “We’ll go through them one by one.”

Morgan said his frustration lies primarily with process rather than disagreement.

“I want to have a good relationship with them,” Morgan said.

Morgan also discussed the financial pressures facing the sheriff’s office, saying the department is operating with a projected shortfall of approximately $160,000.

“We’re going to have to make it work,” Morgan said. “Watch every penny, cut where we can, and rely on any grants that come along.”

To address the shortfall, Morgan said he eliminated one road deputy position, the one most recently held by Sugg, canceled planned vehicle purchases and cut funding for the drug task force.

“My part-time budget went from $55,000 to $24,387,” Morgan said. “Last year, we spent $48,000.”

Morgan said part-time staffing helps reduce overtime costs and provides flexibility, but the reductions limit his ability to manage coverage gaps efficiently.

Staffing pressures extend beyond patrol coverage and include employee retention challenges tied to stagnant wages, Morgan said. County commissioners have previously told all offices that the county can not afford any raises this year.

“I’ve got to figure out how to break it to them that they’re not getting any raises this year again,” Morgan said. “That’s going to be one of my biggest challenges.”

Morgan said the sheriff’s office operates continuously and with limited personnel.

“We’re a twenty-four-seven, 365 operation,” Morgan said. “And we’re doing that with 11 full-time employees.”

Morgan said those employees include seven sworn officers — including the chief deputy, detective and lieutenant — and four full-time jailers responsible for inmate care and facility operations.

“That’s boots on the ground, answering calls, feeding inmates and taking care of jail operations,” Morgan said.

Morgan said additional financial pressure is expected as 911 operations transition away from the sheriff’s office, requiring accumulated compensatory time to be paid out.

“I’ve got $10,000 budgeted just for anticipated comp time payouts related to 911,” Morgan said.

Morgan said grant funding remains one of the few avenues available to offset budget limitations but noted that reimbursement-based grants pose challenges for small counties with limited cash flow.

“A lot of grants want you to front the money first,” Morgan said. “That’s a real big pain for smaller agencies.”

Despite the reductions, Morgan said the sheriff’s office will continue to provide full law enforcement services to county residents.

“We’re still going to be able to run services in Maries County,” Morgan said. “There’s absolutely no reason for anybody to be scared we can’t provide service.”

Morgan said he hopes to avoid litigation with the county commission but warned that decisions affecting his statutory duties could leave him with no alternative.

“I don’t want to sue the county,” Morgan said. “But when decisions directly impact my ability to execute my office, that’s the position it puts me in.”

Morgan said transparency and accountability remain priorities.

“These are taxpayer dollars,” Morgan said. “People deserve to know where they’re going.”

Morgan said his focus remains on maintaining public safety despite financial constraints.

“My main concern is being able to answer calls and serve the citizens of Maries County,” Morgan said. “We’re going to get there regardless.”