"Others serving house arrest with electronic monitoring devices have been allowed to take authorized leave to address personal and business matters. Why is Marissa Alexander being held to a different standard than others who are in similar monitoring situations?" the group said in a statement. "The state's motion is nothing more than a smear tactic to undermine Alexander's credibility and criminalize her character in an attempt to sway public opinion before Alexander's new trial at the end of March."
In a Wednesday court filing, Corey says the corrections counselor from whom Alexander acquired permission to leave her home lacked authority to make those decisions. Alexander, Corey says, was specifically banned from making trips other than for court or medical emergency-related purposes.
"[T]he Court is the 'agency' which determines whether [Alexander’s] actions - 'approved' or not - comply with its Orders, and the Court gave no such approval," Corey says in the supplemental filing. "The State has elected to bring the matter before the Court so that the Court may determine whether to accept a patently absurd 'approved conduct defense' and continue its largesse."
Updated 01/08/14: An update was attached to this article after Corey submitted a supplemental court filing.