Local
Oklahoma audit dispute puts Swadley’s $3.1 million restitution request in focus
Brent Swadley is challenging State Auditor Cindy Byrd over records tied to an audit used in his fraud trial, as he awaits sentencing. The auditor’s office says no final report exists and opposes releasing underlying material; Swadley’s lawyers say the state may rely on the work to seek $3.1 million in restitution.
Oklahoma restaurant owner Brent Swadley sued State Auditor and Inspector Cindy Byrd on Monday, Oct. 19, seeking records about an audit connected to his conviction for defrauding the state. The dispute comes as Swadley prepares for a sentencing hearing scheduled to begin Wednesday, Oct. 21, in Oklahoma County District Court.
A jury found Swadley guilty in May of six felony counts, including conspiracy to defraud Oklahoma. The case stemmed from his company’s work renovating and operating restaurants in state parks. At sentencing, the court is also expected to consider how much restitution Swadley must pay. Prosecutors are seeking $3.1 million, according to his attorneys.
The audit was requested by the Oklahoma County district attorney in April 2022. It examined payments by the Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department to Swadley’s Foggy Bottom Kitchen. During the trial, Deputy State Auditor Melissa Capps testified about the audit’s findings, and a spreadsheet summarizing those findings was admitted as evidence. The audit itself was not introduced.
Swadley’s defense says it has sought the audit, drafts and supporting materials, but the state has not provided them. In a separate court filing dated Oct. 13, his lawyers asked the judge to require the state to turn over audit-related material before the punishment and restitution proceedings.
The defense’s lawsuit against Byrd says the auditor’s office was notified Oct. 1 that Swadley intended to sue if the records were not provided. His lawyers argue the public should be able to see how officials handled an audit that they say involved more than 3,000 hours of work paid for with public funds. They also point to a December 2025 statement that the audit’s release was on hold pending approval from the attorney general.
The State Auditor’s Office is asking a judge to block Swadley’s request for additional records. In its filings, the office says it has no final audit report because staff assisted the Attorney General’s investigation, and argues the underlying material is protected from disclosure.
The Attorney General’s Office directed questions about the audit to the auditor’s office. It said in a statement that a jury found Swadley guilty and that it remained focused on the case and the upcoming sentencing. The State Auditor’s Office declined to comment. A judge has not ruled on the records dispute.
The competing filings leave unresolved what audit materials exist and whether they can be withheld while state officials seek restitution based in part on the audit work. The decision could affect what evidence is available as the court determines the financial consequences of Swadley’s conviction.