Will Paris Stay in Jail This Time?

June 8, 2007 — -- As Paris Hilton pinballs back into jail today, the California legal community is buzzing about the biggest L.A. legal drama since the O.J. verdict.

One attorney said today's decision to send her back to jail was the result of a "policy power showdown'' between a veteran judge and a popular sheriff.

But the final outcome is anything but certain. An appeal is expected.

The policy in question is this: Who has jurisdiction over prisoners once they have been sentenced, the sheriff or the judge?

Legal experts and California lawyers who spoke with ABC News are split over that question.

In general, legal experts say it's the county sheriff, and not the judge, who exercises oversight over inmates in county jail. The sheriff, however, is expected to honor specific judicial orders, and one thing Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Sauer specified was no electronic monitoring.

But complicating the matter for legal experts is the mysterious medical condition that prompted the heiress' early release in the first place, after serving just three full days in jail.

Even an impending nervous breakdown should not, in most attorneys' opinions, be the basis for an early release.

Had the sheriff released her to ease overcrowding, attorneys who spoke to ABC News said, it likely would have been looked upon more sympathetically by the court.

"This was a policy power showdown between the judiciary and sheriff's department, both of whom are very powerful," said attorney Dana Cole, adding that it's not unusual for the sheriff's office to release inmates early to electronic monitoring at home, because of longstanding overcrowding in California's prison system.

"If they had let her out for early release rather than for medical reasons, they would have had a better case," Cole said, but a "quasi medical reason does smack of two-tier justice."

Attorney Mark Geragos told ABC News that he felt the judge violated the California penal code.

"I don't think legally he [the judge] can do what he did. It was a double punishment. ... She was sentenced once. … The fact that the sheriff released her was his prerogative. The judge can't then resentence her. This is violative of the California penal code."

Loyola School of Law professor Laurie Levinson agreed. "The sheriff does have jurisdiction over custody,'' Levinson said. "The issue comes down to whether this is a placement question of where she serves her time or if the sheriff was circumventing the court order,'' she added.

"The judge got ticked off at the sheriff's special treatment and wanted control,'' Levinson speculated. "From the beginning this was an overreaction on everyone's part [and] today was no different,'' she said. Levinson said this "never would have been a 45-day sentence for someone else … it took on a life of its own, which is the nature of celebrity justice."

"Bringing an appeal is an interesting issue,'' Levinson continued. "If the record doesn't indicate that there is a basis for the sheriff's decision, that there is an issue of who is in control … it is hard to believe the appeals court will want to take this on, but it will buy some time.''

Judge Sauer was clearly angered by the move to send Paris home.

"I at no time condoned the actions of the sheriff, and at no time told him I approved the actions," he said in court today. "At no time did I approve the defendant being released from custody to her home on Kings Road," Sauer said. The judge also said he never received papers from the sheriff about the fact that Hilton had a "medical condition," and asking him to reconsider his order.

Darren Kavinoky, a defense attorney and former prosecutor who specializes in DUI cases, agreed with Judge Sauer.

Kavinoky said this was the "right decision to honor the court's original order."

And like many in the legal community who have followed the case closely, Kavinoky felt sympathy for the defendant.

"Overall, she's being treated too harshly."