Parole revoked for Morgan Medgar; board cites missed reporting, substance use and involvement in altercation
Loading...
Summary
The Committee on Parole voted Oct. 21 to revoke Morgan Medgar’s parole after finding he failed to report as directed, had a 2024 arrest that led to later refusal of charges, and tested positive for drugs while in reentry housing. The board recommended DOC custody with substance‑abuse programming.
The Louisiana Committee on Parole revoked the parole of Morgan Medgar on Oct. 21, 2025, after concluding he failed to report as directed and had involvement in an April 2025 disturbance for which charges were later refused.
Medgar appeared from the Orleans Justice Center and pleaded guilty to failure to report and not guilty to an allegation of engaging in criminal activity connected to a 2024‑2025 disturbance. His attorney and supporters from the Orleans Public Defender’s Office described a substantial community support plan, training and employment steps, and educational programming Medgar had participated in while in custody. Medgar acknowledged a continuing substance‑use problem and said he planned to enroll in outpatient treatment; advocates described steps to secure a TWIC card and other employment supports.
Board members divided on the outcome. One member voted to revoke and recommended DOC placement with substance‑abuse programming, citing Medgar’s history of failing to report and positive drug screens while in community housing. Another member voted not to revoke, citing the support plan and willingness to engage in programming. Because two votes were required to avoid revocation and the chair indicated he would revoke, the board’s majority outcome revoked parole and ordered placement in a DOC facility with programming; the revocation was recorded at about 11:15 a.m.
The hearing record includes that Medgar had been removed from a reentry program after a positive drug screen and that he had been on parole multiple times previously. The board directed DOC to place Medgar in a facility offering substance‑use treatment; no conditional community supervision was granted.

