E-Filed Document Feb 21 2018 12:27:11 2018-TS-00233 Pages: 14

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

IN RE: DISTRICTATTORNEY OF THE

SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT PETITIONER

CAUSE NO. : 2018-TS-00233

PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR REHEARING OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR A

CLARIFICATION OF THE COURT'S ORDER

COMES NOW, the District Attorney for the Seventh Judicial District and

moves this Honorable Court to reconsider the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and

Motion to Stay the Respondent's Order in this cause, pursuant to Mississippi Rules of

Appellate Procedure, Rule 40, and would show unto this Court the following, to wit:

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. On February 14, 2018, Petitioner filed for a Writ of Mandamus seeking a ruling

by this Court to issue an Order to the Hinds County Senior Circuit Court Judge to

convene a hearing regarding the wrongful release of Nicholas Coats in the Capital

Murder of Chelsie Kirschten. In response, on February 16, 2018, the Senior Circuit

Court Judge ordered the Hinds County Grand Jury to reconvene the week of February

20, 2018, and specifically instructed the Petitioner to present the Coats case to said

Grand Jury, without consultation with the Petitioner. Also on February 16, 2018,

Petitioner filed an Emergency Motion to Stay the Respondent's Order with this Court.

ISSUES AND RELEIF SOUGHT

2. On February 20, 2018, this Court handed down its Order denying both of
Petitioner's requests for action. As the Court appears to have overlooked or

misapprehended several key points argued by the Petitioner, a rehearing is respectfully

requested.

STATEMENT OF ISSUES AND RELIEF SOUGHT

Petitioner did not possess the Coats file as stated in the Order.

3. The Court's Order specifically states, "[t]he District Attorney has had four and

a half months in which to present this matter to the Hinds County Grand Jury."

However, the evidence presented to the Court shows the District Attorney did not obtain

that file until January 22, 2018, as shown in the Petitioner's Motion for Writ of

Mandamus Exhibit "B" (see Jackson Police Department Memorandum with attached

list of submitted cases). (Attached hereto as Exhibit 1).

4. The Jackson Police Department Memorandum clearly shows that the Coats case

was not turned over to Petitioner for Indictment until January 22, 2018, two weeks after

the empaneling and reconvening of the first 2018 Grand Jury session, as ordered by

Senior Circuit Court Judge. Further that the next empaneling and reconvening of the

second 2018 Grand Jury session was not scheduled until the week of April 10, 2018, as

ordered by Senior Circuit Court Judge (see Order Empaneling and Reconvening Grand

Jury 2018). (Exhibit 2 filed under seal). Petitioner did not have four and a half months

in which to present this matter to the Hinds County Grand Jury. The Grand Jury was

between terms (as set by order of the Senior Circuit Court Judge) when Petitioner

received the case for indictment. Petitioner and victims relied on the procedural

safeguards created by the Senior Circuit Court Judge and subsequently adopted by this

Honorable Court as a rule, requiring a hearing or review before the Senior Circuit Court
Judge prior to the release of a suspect held without bond after 90 days. Coats was

released without a hearing and without any notification to Petitioner or to victims on

January 10, 2018. Petitioner did not receive the case until January 22, 2018.

5. The Court's Order is largely based on this oversight and a rehearing of the matter

would ensure a decision reached upon the basis of uncontradicted facts.

The Respondent was not in compliance with Rule 8.5

6. Without discussion, the Court concluded Judge Green's actions related to Rule

8.5, were reasonable, appropriate and consistent. Rule 8.5(b) Amendment of

Conditions states, "The court may, for good cause shown, on its own initiative or on

application of either party, modify the conditions of release, after first giving the parties

an adequate opportunity to respond to the proposed modification." In Coats' case the

District Attorney duly petitioned the lower court for a hearing and gave proper notice

to the defense as evidenced by the Certificate of Service shown in Exhibits "B" and "C"

of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus. The only response from the Senior Circuit Court

Judge was a sticky note in the case of Exhibit "B" and an email response to Exhibit "C",

as evidenced by the Petition for Writ's Exhibit "D".

6. The Court did not address the issue of Judge Green's Order of Procedure for

Bond Review ofUnindicted Cases, dated September 24, 2013, presented in the Petition

for Writ of Mandamus as Exhibit "E". (Attached hereto as Exhibit "3"). In that order,

the District Attorney, as prosecutor, shall appear at a hearing for bond review to give

cause why the defendant should not be released. (Emphasis added). There is no

evidence that Judge Green's order has been amended or rescinded since its filing date.
 7. However, in a subsequent email from the Senior Circuit Court Judge to the

District Attorney, the lower court stated that it may review a case without a hearing as

previously mandated by her. (See Exhibit "4"). The email continues that the Senior

Circuit Court Judge is not required to review conditions of release set by another judge.

(Id.)

8. This situation wherein the sitting Senior Court Judge is either without power or

duty to review cases, or even formally respond to motions to do so, which Rule 8.5 and

her own order require, preempts all constitutional due process rights and all legal

notions relating to victims' rights, specifically derived from Mississippi Crime Victims'

Bill of Rights.

9. Petitioner has explicitly been informed by the Senior Circuit Court Judge that she

is not inclined to take up matters where other courts, inferior to her own, set conditions

of bond; while, at the same time, Petitioner has contrarily been informed by the Senior

Circuit Court judge that she now reserves the power to release anyone without her own

mandated requirement of a hearing. If this is true the District Attorney would never

have recourse to bring similarly situated cases before a judge short of reconvening a

Grand Jury in every case nor would a victim in a case have the opportunity to

participate.

9. Petitioner reasserts that the lower court's actions are not in conformity with Rule

8.5, requiring a review of the issue of release, or that the Senior Circuit Court Judge

reviewed the Coats' file and subsequently ordered the suspect released without notice

to the District Attorney or to the victims. This court should clarify the law and the
requirements of Rule 8. 5 as a matter of judicial efficiency to prevent future cases from

being in the same situation.

Issues not addressed in the Court's February 20th Order

10. The lower court's behavior oversteps judicial boundaries and impedes upon the

prosecutorial role vested in the District Attorney. The issue of whether the Senior

Circuit Court Judge overstepped her authority, in the Motion for Stay, by ordering

specific cases be heard by the Grand Jury was not discussed in this Honorable Court's

ruling. As discussed, supra, Petitioner did not possess the Coats case file for four and

a half months as stated by this Court. Further, the Senior Circuit Court Judge did not

communicate with the Petitioner prior to setting a date to reconvene the Grand Jury.

The order specifically states that the Petitioner is to present the Coats case to the Grand

Jury with no knowledge of the posture of the case. This is a misuse of the power for a

Senior Circuit Court Judge to reconvene the Grand Jury and could stand to damage the

presentation of this case and others already similarly situated or those that may follow

suit. This issue in and of itself requires a clarification from this court as to future cases

in a similar situation.

11. Last, and certainly not least, is the issue of victims' rights as argued by

Petitioner. The Mississippi Crime Victim's Bill of Rights mandates that the victims, in

the case of Coats being the survivors of Chelsie Kirschten, has the right to be present

and participate in the proceedings. By the inaction and refusal of the Senior Circuit

Judge to set a hearing, Chelsie Kirscheten's survivors have been shut out of the process.

REASONS THE REHEARING SHOULD BE HELD

12. Incorporating all of the issues argued and discussed in this Motion for
Rehearing, Petitioner maintains that the interests of justice would be best served by the

Court by taking this cause up for rehearing based on the overlooked or misapprehended

issues presented.

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, Petitioner respectfully asks that this

Court rehear this cause and to then issue an appropriate Order to allow Petitioner to present its

case to the Senior Circuit Court Judge, not only as to the Coats case but for any and all similarly

situated cases; or, in the alternative, Petitioner asks that this Court issue a clarification of the

Court's February 20 1h Order.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this the 21st day of February, 2018.

Pat McNamara
Asst. District Attorney
7th Judicial District
PO Box 22747 - Jackson Mississippi 39225-2747
Phone: 601-968-6568
FAX: 601-968-6655
pmcnamara@co.hinds.ms. us
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Pat McNamara, Assistant District Attorney, do hereby certify that I have this date

emailed a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Motion to:

Honorable Tomie Green

Senior Circuit Court Judge
Frances Ashley, Court Administrator
fashley@co .hincls.ms. us

DAMON STEVENSON
Defense Attorney
damon.steven@gmail.com

This the 2151 day of February, 2018.

 case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 7 . Filed: 01/22/2018 Page 4 of 5

-Mli)pr Investigations
- '\ ~j :
1· 327 East Pascagoi'.1 la ,Street
J~ckson, MS 39206 II '
~Ii:
rt, j (~oi) 960-1~1s ~qffl~e n
:::J·i 1
(60!) 960~1642 -fax ft
•1 JI

...... =r= .i~!'

/ll· \' I

= rr~=-:~~-;.::t!·~J !t· 1
.~ • ' ·, .t i',
I
To:~.
-
~o~_eifee mith, Dlsjrfct Attorl'v
I ..
. ~~ ---; -1-· ·~ ~ i..
F~.o·m: 't'yr'o_ne,f\ ley1 Deputy Chief.
I
r
~' . ii•/,_",~"3tC•,i·)i: ' ,a~,}
;.a ..i::u
uate~1 -J<!nu~W'.2?t 2.01a "'>s,1-l. , _
•:f' )=.;: ~· ,.i( -J~
J - '·:i :: --':'f!:'jL ~·-, • .' . ,- J

iii',
G;aJ.1]UfrrV~
,111: -~ ~"· S~b111i~ilti~b)
-.~, ., ,. _I_. . -~,;,.:. see
. attachment "·:. U" , .
=-=!,I,

P, _,-:_ '.~!,+t- ·~ ,-=-.

L: -~

+· 'I 1· ~I '"
. 1..~\ :f' ~:...-·

~/1 ~as,-se:
-b~_
lt..J list!_~1~ses_t~a~ .r_e.,~e!ng submitt-e~il ~o the Hinds (O!J~tv District Att9rneYfs ·.
offk:e ,fp,r: r,.,·
•
m,dlc;tment
~ .. :,
1- , ~
process'
,
. ~fter., rec~1vlng
Ii and reviewing
-· ! the below listed
I
cases, If.any,
I
, i. ' .:;i 11
1
member ofy9i;Ufri,~<i:l;.,_ re.cognlzes a p6tentlal pr~blem~with any case, please.h~ve,thegi ~rlng ,jti,
to t;l)',l,, attentlon Im-mediately. Oµr goal_ls to seeka successful indictment; therefore, we,~111,: do!
eve~hhig'. w~~lt\o.ur piwe~,t~ ·~~·rrect strengthen1!ach case. '., or
• •T~O :I -~-4 ::t. l 'I" r

'' ltrls our goal'. to·prepar.e :'and p,resent each case without delay. With your cooperation arid
Sl!PPbrftt·it!: ·C,~l'l
·:...n'·~!-
accomplished.
~h
be·
Please slgn-·b~~w-~r. ~ave your deslgnee sign, Indicating receipt of the,attached felony. ca~es(s).
0

This sheet w11r.be maintained.by o_ur office in an ~ffort to Increase case tracking. I offer my
thanks, in advance. If you have any -questions,
I
please do not hesitate to contact me or one of
my unit super or ..;

Delivered b ·~ r-~~'-tt------ -""" Jc9,.;;._(;g

Received by:-+-:,,....,.-•"-,~ ~.,....-~ . . - - , , - - - - --D~te: ,z;'2-/li'ZJ
EXHIBIT

f I
 Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463_-WLS Document#: 7 Filed: 01/22/2018 Page 5 of 5

Case#
~--·
Suspect
- - - ---·
Charge Detective

2017-134070 ladarius Dixon Murder/Shooting Into an Corry Jenkins

.Occupied Vehh:le
-
2017-1.3 4070 Jushun Paige Acces.sory After the Fact Corty Jenkl~ ·--
-
2017-134070 ,Nicholas Coats Murder/Shooting Into an Corry Jenkl11s
- - Occupied Vehlcle I'
-·:l.i._ -

,2017-186186 Richard Grisham Aggravated Assault Jas""ln H_aynes

1'!1--
~0;1:~l86i86 -Pesttni Grisham , Aggravated'Assault .Jasmin HayA1f!S
= - ·-
2017-15S930 iBarney Smoot P/S Marijuana w/intent Carl Ellis I
,,.
- -
20'1 7-168393 ·Dontario Robinson P/S Marijuana with Firearm - .... Roy Dickerson I

2_0 17~14902~·
-
_Xavier Taylor
............
Possession of Marijuana
---- Tarlk Williams·
JIJai.;.: - - ,,, ;,-
~

,.,
2017~20851?7 ~!~hard Ne'!,Vell P/S-Stolen Firearm . WarrenJ mu _., ~ -·
- [tit~~;;:~ ~- .- ..
; .
~---,...---:-.,. -
·2015::012294 Danlelle Graham P/S M·ethamphelarpln'_! P/S Carl E'llls :1~ ~', j) .
I ·"', ·,a

1·
I Oxcyoldone1, P/S. Hydrocodo.l'le .!'
....
, 2Q17·126593 Ccirey Wright Possession of Marlh.a"ana,wlttra 1
'Carl Ellis
I Firearm
'
2018-00121'8 ,WIIJle Ray Norris House Burglary Jerry MeWilltams
. '
.. ,
' -
20~ 7-196270 ,Emon Shokoohi Business Burglary Sharon Jord.?n .
- .. ---·~ -- -- -- - ~-
2017--Z03434
,
1:toosevelt Burglary of Occupied Owelllng Sharon Jordan
Greenwood
2017....l17668S Cleveland Alllson
,__ __________
Uttering of a Forged lnstrum·e nt Sharon Jordan

2017-173444 WIIUam Llpperts Business Burglary Sharon Jordan

... - ~.. - -·-·
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

IN RE: DISTRICTATTORNEY OF THE

SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT PETITIONER

CAUSE NO.: 2018-TS-00233

PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR REHEARING OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR A

CLARIFICATION OF THE COURT'S ORDER

Exhibit 2
SEALED
 lbb S~P 2 ; 2013

MINUTES CIRCUIT COURT, 1ST DISTRICT, HINDS COUNTY Sfp <

- - 3
- - - - -__.::....::..:._ _ _ TERM, 20_!_

·)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST/SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF

F I li E D HINDS COUNTY,MISSISSIPPI
SEP 2 4 2013 NO.
BARBARA DUNN, CIRCUIT CLERK --------- --- --
S'L O.C.
IN RE: PERSONS ARRESTED, CHARGED WITI-l A FELONY AND DETAJNED IN JAIL
IN EXCESS OF 90 DAYS WITHOUT ISSUANCE OF INDICTMENTS

ORDER OF PROCEDURE FOR BOND REVIEW OF UNINDlCTED DETAINEES

Our Mississippi Constitution states that an accused is "innocent" until proven guilty

In order to comply-with constitutional mand~tes against arresting and detaining individuals for

unreasonable and indefinite periods ohime without formal indictment, and in accordance with

the grand jury's findings·in its September 13, 2013 report,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that when an accused is arrested on a

felony charge, and is held without bond or fails and is .unable to make bail his/her case shall be

presented for indictment before a Hinds County grand jury within ninety (90) days of his date of

incarceration. Should the prosecutor fail to present said accused's case to the grand jury for

indictment within the ninety (90) day time frame, then the Prosecutor shall appear at a bond

review hearing before the senior circuit judge to show good cause why the accused should

remain incarcerated, without indictment having been issued. Any indigent accused shall be

represented by the Public Defender of Hinds County.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Hinds County District Attorney
,,.

7shall, simulta . n ~ith his filing with circuit clerk, deliver to the Senior Circuit Court Judge of

Md the funds Cmmty Sheriff, dooket of oil INDICTMENTS ood NO BILLS.

EXHIBIT
VBM Bookb!l'(llng E1J005fi9LD I 3
 SEP 2 ,1 2013 157
MINUTES CIRCUIT COURT, 1ST DISTRICT, HINDS COUNTY - - - - - - - - - -- - - TERM, 20--,,--,,
SEP J 3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Hinds County Sheriff shall on or

about the last day of each month, beginning the last day of October, 2013 and continuing on the

last date of every month thereafter, deliver to the Senior Circuit Judge and the Hinds County

District Attorney, a jail docket kept pursuant to Mississippi law, of all persons who are being

detained in the jails of Hinds County or who are detained in some convenient county jail

pursuant to Section 47-3-1, Miss. Code Ann. (l 97f) for more than 90 days of their arrest,

without an indicunent having been issued.

The Cirtuil Clerk of Hinds Cou11ty sh nil send an attested copy of the herein order to the

S~crif[ of Hinds County, all mayors, municipal judges nrul police chle~ of nil cif)o' ll1Jtl

towns in Hind~ County, all members of the Hiuds Countv Ilonrd of Supervisors, lhe

County Admlnistrntor, the Rinds CountyDisirlct Attorney and tho Hind~ Countv Public

Defender.

sooRD=~oADJU~=L
TOMIE GREEN, SENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGE

Vesl Bookbir.rting E1300569LD

.......
From: Tamie Green
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2018 1:25 PM
To: Robert Smith; Patrick McNamara; Jamie McBride
Cc: Frances Ashley; Greens Staff Attorney
Subject: Grand Jury Recalled for Thursday, February 2018

Hello Gentlemen,

In order to help the DA's office to resolved the Nicholas Coats matter, I have recalled the grand jury for next Thursday
February 22, 2018 at 9:00am for you to present your case and Nicholas Coats, and any other that you have ready . If Mr
Coats is the only case you have ready, then you can present his case and release the grand jury. It is well settled law,
that the Court can recall grand jury at anytime. This is what I suggested to you last week, after you left your county
court motion in my office . Everything does not have to become vendetta against this office . This Court presides in
criminal cases. The Courts must be fair to both the State and the accused. Our oaths require and the Constitution
mandates that an accused is "innocent" until proven otherwise. This precept should be echo collectlively by ALL
stakeholders in the criminal justice system, not just the judiciary.

Last September/October 2017, Chief Waller and Presiding Justice Smith trained the stakeholders in Hinds County on the
New Criminal Rules that went into effect on July 1, 2017 . The District Attorney and Assistant District Attorney's were
invited, along with the Public Defenders, the Sheriff, Police Chiefs, all circuit, municipal, county and justice court judges,
Unfortunately, neither the DA nor anyone else from your office attended. Likewise, no one from the Justice court
showed up. Nonetheless, Rule 8.5, to include 8.S(c) and it's mandates was addressed. Rule 8.S(c) was included to
prevent accused person from lingering in the jail for long periods of time without being indicted. The DA is not
precluded from presenting a case to the jury after a person makes bond or is released on their personal recognizance.
As a matter of fact a person can be indicted after being arrested at all. Bond is set to assure appearance at trial, not to
punish the accused . When the initial bond is set, under our new rules that bond follows the accused all the way thru
indictment. When indicted or when an assigned judge has been made, generally at arraignment, if not befor, the circuit
judge can modify the bond or bond conditions.

Judge Skinner conduct a prelim in October 2017. It is my understanding that an ADA is present the prelims.
Consequently, the DA's office was aware of Judge Skinner's deadlines and order. The DA's office has been aware of
similar county court orders for years. In Nicholas Coats case, the DA never challenged the deadline as set by Skinner
The DA did not appeal Judge Skinner's order, nor ask Judge Skinner to extend the deadline because you did not have a
police report for grand jury presentation . The order is four months old . It was 3 months old when Coats was release .

Moreover, for the last 3-4 years, the Sheriff's office has provide directly to the DA and the judges a list of all persons held
in jail 90 days or more, without indictment As Well As persons who were in jail who HAD BEEN indicted had not been
disposed of. This has Ben required by the DOJ under our decent decree which came after my 2013 similar order. Last
year, this Rule was adopted by the MS Supreme Court with some modifications. Nicholas Coats was on the list in
November, December and January. Rule 8.S(c) requires that the Senior Circuit Judge " review" cases, with or without a
hearing where the accused remains IN JAIL. Nicholas Coats was released January 10, 2018, long before your office filed
its motion. There is nothing in the new criminal rule that requires the Senior Circuit judge to review bond conditions or
terms of release of all accused whose bond or the conditions of bond set by another judge . If the DA is dissatisfied with
the order, then he should seek relief the judge who filed the order. The release of Coats was the result of the jail
following a judge's order. I opine th at the release was not wrongful. The jail is expected to follow judge's orders, unless
and until the have a subsequent order that overrides the earlier release order.

EXHIBIT

I 4:
 As I stated before, your relief in this case should have been to recall the grand jury as soon as you learned of the Coats
rel~ ~se,_. ~:,;T"i'ewn~yi l.J ~Q.4J ld have the assigned circuit judge to address the matte r. This Cou rt is not duty bound to review
4and ~ove rturn lower court 's ruling, except in properly filed APPEALS. It is unfair for th e DA's office to seek oth erwise. ·
Mr. Coats has been out of jail for over a month, the DA has not sought indictment. The process of getting him back
before the proper circuit judge could have been solved in a week if the grand jury had been immediately recalled.

Working together for The citizens of the 7th Circuit Districts and her citizens, I remain Sincerely,

Tomie T. Green, Senior Circuit Judge

7th Circuit Court District- State of MS P.O. Box 327 Jackson MS 39295

2
Serial: 217511
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI

No. 2018-TS-00233

FILED
IN RE: DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE Petitioner
SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT FEB 2 O2018
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
SUPREME COURT
COURT OF APPEALS
ORDER

This matter is before the panel of Waller, C.J., Kitchens, P.J., and Beam, J., on the

Petition for Writ of Mandamus and the Emergency Motion to Stay Order of Respondent filed

by the District Attorney for the Seventh Circuit Court District. According to the petitioner,

in October of 2017, Nicholas Coats was bound over to await action of the Hinds County

Grand Jury on felony charges of murder and shooting into an occupied vehicle. Bail was

denied. The order of Hinds County Court Judge William Skinner stated that, "[i]f the

Defendant remains in jail without posting bond and is not served a capias after indictment

by a grand jury by January 2, 2018, he/she shall be released from custody on this charge for

lack of prosecution without further order of this Court." Coats was not indicted and was

released pursuant to the County Judge's order on or about January 10, 2018. Thereafter, the

Hinds County District Attorney filed two motions in Hinds County Circuit Court in which

the State asked that Coats be returned to custody without bond. The State also asked the

Circuit Judge to hold a hearing on the matter of Coats's pre-trial detention. Judge Tomie

Green declined to hold a hearing, and the State filed its request for mandamus in which it

asked this Court to compel the Circuit Judge to hold a hearing. Judge Green responded by
issuing an order reconvening the Hinds County Grand Jury, thus giving the State the

opportunity to present the Coats case for indictment. The State also seeks a stay of that

order. The State argues that it has not received adequate notice and that it is not prepared to

seek an indictment of Mr. Coats at this time.

After due consideration, the panel finds that the District Attorney has had four and a

half months in which to present this matter to the Hinds County Grand Jury. The panel finds

that Judge Green's actions are consistent with Rule 8.5 of the Mississippi Rules of Criminal

Procedure and are reasonable and appropriate. The panel finds that both filings should be

denied.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Emergency Motion to Stay Order ofRespondent

is denied.

SO ORDERED, this the 20th day of February, 2018.

2
Ol\\GU\l\.

f';J!eJcGe,./cy /lJ{)7liJ;J ~ 5!;1/ tJ(</)elc

o~ f!_e_ s/c:r/11/JeAI r
-
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Pat McNamara, Assistant District Attorney, do hereby certify that I have this date

emailed a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Motion to:

Honorable Tomie Green

Senior Circuit Court Judge
Frances Ashley, Court Administrator
fashley@co.hinds.ms.us

DAMON STEVENSON
Defense Attorney
damon.steven@gmail.com

This the 16 1h day of February, 2018.

BY:
. ~lU\\\~
a~ · .. IN THE SUPREME COURT m' THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
FILED
FEB 14 2018
OFFICt: 0;- 1ttc v1.c.t1K
SUPREME COURT
IN RE: DISTRICTATTORNEY OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT PETITIONER

CAUSENO. J()/8-/vf-m.3..3

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

COMES NOW, the District Attorney for the Seventh Judicial District and

moves this Honorable Court to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Senior Circuit

Court Judge of the Seventh Judicial District to convene a hearing regarding the improper

release of defendant Nicholas Coates from custody pending grand jury action and would

show unto this Court the following, to wit:

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. On October 2, 2017, Coates appeared before the Hinds County Court for a

preliminary hearing, relating to the Fortification Street murder of Chelsie Kirschten,

occurring on or about August 17, 2017. At the conclusion of said hearing the court

ordered Coates bound over to await action by the Hinds County Grand Jury. Bail was

denied under MISS. CONST., Art. 3, Section (29)(3), as well as a determination of

dangerousness to the community. (Exhibit A).

2. On January 10, 2018, without notice to the District Attorney's Office or to the

County Court, in violation of Miss. Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.5(c), as well as the

Order issued by the Senior Circuit Court Judge on September 24, 2013. (Exhibit E).

Coates was summarily released from the Hinds County Detention Center without

restrictions.

MOTION# 2018 Ce19

 3. The Petitioner moved the County Court to bring Coates before that tribunal for

a hearing on the wrongful release of the defendant Coates. That court declined to set a

hearing stating that it had lost jurisdiction in the matter with Coates release. (Exhibit

B).

4. Petitioner then moved the Senior Circuit Judge of the District to set the matter

for hearing. (Exhibit C). The only response by the Court was a sticky note attached to

the hard copy of the motion that had been hand delivered to the office of the Senior

Circuit Court Judge stating this was not the Senior Judge's case.

5. Petitioner once again moved the Senior Circuit Judge to take action, based upon

the requirements of Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.5 and the need to address the required

factors under Lee v. Lawson, 375 So. 2d 1019, 1024 (Miss. 1979); the only response

from the Court was an email stating the court could not hear the matter as filed or under

Rule 8.5( c) (Exhibit D). The email went on to state that the Petitioner should consider

recalling the Grand Jury to hear the matter. (Id.)

STATEMENT OF ISSUES AND RELIEF SOUGHT

6. By virtue of Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.5 the Senior Circuit Court Judge of

the District is the main arbiter of the decision to release unindicted prisoners. However,

Petitioner is being informed by the Senior Circuit Court Judge that it lacks the authority

to do what is clearly stated in the Rules of Criminal Procedure, that it, the senior court,

has a duty to do.

7. As evidenced by the Senior Circuit Court's Order dated September 24, 2013,

any incarcerated defendant not presented to the grand jury within 90 days is entitled to

a hearing before the Senior Circuit Judge. (Exhibit E). That same document requires a
prosecutor be present at a hearing to show cause why the defendant should not be

released. (Id.) The Senior Circuit Court Judge has taken away the Petitioner's right to

be present and give evidence in this cause.

8. The Senior Circuit Court Judge suggests the Petitioner recall the Grand Jury as

soon as possible to remedy this situation. Petitioner asserts that the matter at hand can

only be properly concluded by the immediate scheduling of a hearing, requiring the

Senior Circuit Court Judge to exercise a power already held by her court. The next

meeting of the Grand Jury does not take place until April 10, 2018, a date set by the

Senior Circuit Court Judge. Denial of Petitioner's right to a hearing in this matter flies

in the face of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, judicial efficiency and monetary

economy. Further, Senior Circuit Court Judge's failure to grant Petitioner's request for

hearing unjustly delays and denies victims' the right to be present and participate in the

criminal justice proceedings and the right not to be excluded from such pursuant to

Mississippi Crime Victims' Bill of Rights. Given the urgency of this matter and the

clear potential for irreparable harm, there is no other alternative remedy to this matter.

REASONS THE WRIT SHOULD ISSUE

9. The Mississippi Supreme Court has held that a petitioner must prove the
following essential elements before a writ of mandamus may issue:
(1) the petitioner must be authorized to bring the suit, (2) there must be a clear right
in [the] petitioner to the relief sought, (3) there must exist a legal duty on the part of
the defendant to do the thing which the petitioner seeks to compel, and (4) there
must be no other adequate remedy at law.

Bennett v. Bd. ofSup'rs of Pearl River Cnty., 987 So. 2d984, 986 (iJ6) (Miss. 2008).

10. There is no question that the Petitioner, as the District Attorney, is authorized to

bring this action to further the safety of the community. The clear right of the Petitioner

is shown in the quoted statutes and within the Senior Circuit Court Judge's own Order,
requiring the presence of the Petitioner at all hearings before releasing an unindicted

prisoner. The legal duty of the Senior Circuit Court Judge is clear in that the statutes

and rules, as well as the Senior Circuit Court Judge's own Orders, must be followed.

The Petitioner is left with no reasonable alternative than to ask this Court to issue an

Order requiring the Circuit Court to do its duty.

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, Petitioner respectfully asks that this

Court issue an appropriate Order to allow Petitioner to present its case to the Senior Circuit

Court Judge.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this the 14th day of February, 2018.

Pat McNamara
Asst. District Attorney
7th Judicial District
PO Box 22747 - Jackson Mississippi 39225-2747
Phone: 601-968-6568
FAX: 601-968-6655
pmcnamara@co.hinds.ms.us
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Pat McNamara, Assistant District Attorney, do hereby certify that I have this date

emailed a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Motion to:

Honorable Tamie Green

Senior Circuit Court Judge
Frances Ashley, Court Administrator
fashley@co.hinds.ms. us

DAMON STEVENSON
Defense Attorney
damon.steven@gmail.com

This the 14th day of February, 2018.

Case; 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 8 Filed: 01/30/2018 Page 6 of 9

Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 4 Filed: 10/03/2017 Page 1 of 2

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF

HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CHARGE(S) Murder,

Shooting into an Occupied Vehicle

vs. CASE NO. 17-463

NICHOLAS COATS DEFENDANT

ORDER BINDING DEFENDANT TO AWAIT ACTION OF THE GRAND JURY

AND SETTING BOND/SETTING BAIL

The above-named defendant having been brought before the County Court for a preliminary
hearing on the above charge(s), and the Court having heard testimony and been presented
evidence concerning the charged offense(s), finds that it appears that there is probable cause to
believe that an offense has been committed, to-wit: Murder, Shooting into an Occupied Vehicle

and that the defendant committed said offense(s).

Accordingly, the above-named defendant is hereby bound over to await the action of the
grand jury.

Further:

( ) Bail is set in the amount of S. conditioned upon his/her appearance before the Circuit Court
of the First/Second Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi at the next regular tenn thereof
to answer unto said charge and to remain from day to day and term to term until discharged by
law.

() Bail is hereby denied, as defendant is on probation/parole.

() Bail is hereby denied, under MISS. CONST., Art., 3, Section 29(l)(a), as amended, as
defendant has this date been bound over to await action by the grand jury for a capital offense
where the proof is evident or presumption great.

() Bail is hereby denied, under MISS. CONST., Art., 3, Section 29(1)(b), as amended, as
defendant has this date been bound over for action by the grand jury for a capital offense and
he/she has previously been convicted of a capital offense or other offense punishable by
imprisonment for a maximum of twenty (20) years or more.
Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 8 Filed: 01/30/2018 Page 7 of 9

Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 4 Filed: 10/03/2017 Page 2 of 2

( } Bail is hereby denied, under MISS. CONST., Art. 3, Section 29 (2), as amended, as
defendant was free on bail for a previous felony at the time of the offense herein, which has this
date been bound over for action by the grand jury and being an offense punishable by death, life
imprisonment or imprisonment for more than five (5) years, or grand larceny.

(X) Bail is hereby denied, under MISS. CONST., Art. 3, Section (29)(3), as amended, as the
offense herein, which has this date been bound over for action by the grand jury, is punishable by
imprisonment for a maximum of twenty (20} years or more by life imprisonment, and the proof
is evident or presumption great, and:

(X} the release of the defendant would constitute a special danger to another person and/or to
the community, or

( ) no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the

defendant as required.

Conditioned upon his/her appearance before the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of
Hinds County, Mississippi at the next regular term thereof to answer unto said charge(s) and to
there remain from day to day and tenn to term until discharged by law.

If the Defendant remains in jail without posting bond and is not served a capias after
indictment by a grand jury by January 2, 2018, he/she shall be released from custody on this
charge for lack of prosecution without further order of this Court.

A copy of this Order shall be immediately delivered to the Hinds County District
Attorney's Office and the attorney for the defendant.

This the 2nd day of October, 2017.

Damon Stevenson, Attorney for Defendant

Walter Bleck, Prosecuting Attorney
Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 7 Filed: 01/22/2018 Page 1 of 5

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

vs. CAUSE NO. 17463

NICHOLAS COATS DEFENDANT

MOTION TO PRODUCE DEFENDANT FOR REVIEW DUE TO WRONGFUL

RELEASE

COMES NOW, the State of Mississippi and moves this Honorable Court to bring
the defendant, Nicholas Coats back before this Court for Review due to Wrongful
Release, and in support thereof, the State would show unto this Court the following, to
wit:

1. In October, 2017, the State of Mississippi appeared before this court for a
Preliminary Hearing in the above referenced matter. The Court determined
that there was sufficient probable cause to bind the aforementioned matter
over to await the action of a Hinds County Grand Jury.
2. At that time, the Court made it clear that this defendant would be brought
back before the Court for review of factors under Lee v. Lawson 375 So.2d
1019.
3. A Hinds County Grand Jury met on January 8- January IO, 2018. At no time
prior to, nor during this meeting, did the District Attorney's Office have in its
possession a Grand Jury Case File for the above referenced defendant.
4. To be clear, the District Attorney's Office only received Mr. Coates file, along
with his co-defendant's files, on today, January 22, 2018 (Please see
attachments).
5. On January 10, 2018, the last day for Grand Jury presentment, this defendant
was released from the Hinds County Detention Center at 5:59 pm, without any
notice to the County Court or the District Attorney's Office.
6. The State asks this Court to review this cause, taking in to consideration the
fact that lead detective, Corey Jenkins had not completed his investigation by
the time the Grand Jury was empaneled. Moreover, the State asks this Court to
consider the fact that the District Attorney's Office did not have in its
possession the case files necessary for presentment of this matter, until this
morning, January 22, 2018.
7. Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 8.5(c),
Review by Circuit Court. No later than seven (7) days before the
commencement of each term of circuit court in which criminal cases are
adjudicated, the official(s) having custody of felony defendants being held for
trial, grand jury action, or extradition within the county (or within the county's
judicial districts in which the court term is to be held) shall provide the
Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 7 Filed: 01/22/2018 Page 2 of 5

presiding judge, the district attorney, and the clerk of the circuit court the
names of all defendants in their custody, the charge(s) upon which they are
being held, and the date they were most recently taken into custody. The
senior circuit judge, or such other judge as the senior circuit judge designates,
shall review the conditions of release for every felony defendant who is
eligible for bail and has been in jail for more than ninety (90) days.
8. At no time, prior to this defendant's release, was the District Attorney's Office
given notice of hearing for review of the conditions ofrelease.
9. The prevailing legal authority in this matter, Lee v. Lawson, 375 So.2d 1019,
(1979), *1021 Article 3, Section 29 of the Mississippi Constitution of 1890
reads: "Excessive bail shall not be required, and all persons shall, before
conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for capital offenses when
the proof is evident or presumption great." This constitutional section has
been interpreted to provide a non-discretionary right to bail before conviction
for all offenses, except those offenses punishable by death when the proof of
guilt is evident or the presumption of guilt is great."
10. The facts of this case, coupled with the evidence, will show that the likelihood
for conviction in this matter is great. Therefore, this defendant is not eligible
for bond.

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, the State respectfully asks that this

Defendants bond be revoked due to bond ineligibility, and that he be held without bond.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this the 22th day of January, 2018.

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 7 Filed: 01/22/2018 Page 3 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Shaunte' Washington, Assistant District Attorney, do hereby certify that I have this

date emailed a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Motion to Assistant

Public Defender Greg Spore.

GREG SPORE
Defense Attorney
Office of the Public Defender
gspore@co.hinds.ms. us
This the 22nd day of January, 2018.
Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 7 Filed: 01/22/2018 Page 4 of 5

MaJor Investigations

327 East Pascagoula Street

Jackson, MS 39206
(601) 960-1278 -office#
(601) 960-1642 -fax#

MEMORANDUM
To: Robert S. Smith, District Attorney

From: Tyrone Buckley, Deputy Chief

Date: January 22, 2018

Re: Grand Jury Submfssion(s) - see attachment

Please see below listed cases that are being submitted to the Hinds County District Attorney's
office for indictment process. After receiving and reviewing the below listed cases, If any
member of your office recognizes a potential problem with any case, please have them bring it
to my attention Immediately. Our goal is to seek a successful indictment; therefore, we will do
everything, within our power to correct or strengthen each case.

It is our goal to prepare and present each case without delay. With your cooperation and
support this can be accomplished.

Please sign below or have your designee sign, indicating receipt of the attached felony cases(s).
This sheet will .be maintained by our office in an effort to increase case tracking. I offer my
thanks, in advance. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me or one of
my unit super <

Delivered b ·~-4---'ii,."4.r4'u.-.a..;~----Date:__._~.,._/~
_ _,_/__ ';2{__
___
Received by:_~~,,.....U'-'<-1--c..-"'--~~.-4-.....,,,,------Date:_/f_"l_"'Z-_~_l_~-----

J
 ·case: 25C01:17-cr-00463.-WLS Document#: 7 Filed: 01/22/2018 Page 5 of 5

... - . ··-······-- ·······-------,----------.

Case# Suspect Charge Detective
1-2-0-1-7--1-340_7_0___+-la··-d-arl~sDixo-n-·---+·-M-u-rd-e-r/_S_h_o_ot_in_g_i_nt-o-an·---1---C-o_r_ry-Je-n-ki_n_s_ __

-----------------·- --· Occupied Vehicle-·-----------------········--

2017-134070 Jushun Paige Accessory After the Fact Corry Jenkins

2017-134070 Nicholas Coats ·- Murder/Shooting Into an Corry Jenkins

,__________ Occupied Vehicle
2017-186186 Richard Grisham Aggravated Assault Jasmin Haynes
--------+-----·-· -···----------------+-----------l
2017-186186 Destini Grisham Aggravated Assault Jasmin Haynes
2-0-17----15_5_9_3_0_____1_B_a_r_ne_y_S_m_o_o_t_____l_P/S-Ma.riJiana·;.;7intent--·····-·- _Ca_r_lElll--s---------
·--------+---~------
2017-168393 Dontario Robinson P/S Marijuana with Firearm Roy Dickerson
·-2iii1-i49'0_2_0_ _+-Xa-v-ie_r_T-ay-l-or______ Possession of Marijuana - - - - - + - - - - - - ···--·
Tartk WiUlams
f-------1----------l----c·----·-·-·-··-------·--··-'--·--------<
2017-208567 Richard Newell P/S Stolen Ff rearm Warren Hull
1-----···--·"·-----------------------···--·-+----------1 I

2016-072294 Danlelle Graham P/S Methamphelamine P/S Carl Ellis

I
1 • Oxcyoldone, P/S Hydrocodone ..
2017-126593 ! Corey Wright Possession of Marijuana with a Carl Ellis
I
,_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:___,_~_:_il_:_:_:-a:-:·-~--:~-=-I-~:;:::~
Firearm
:::::ms
43
-~---:--:·-.:~-z·=:=:--,_6-:=s===1 =~:-- [::~::::~:~:::t :::::
.__2_-0=1=1-=1-1_3=4=4=4===twmram Upperts -, 8US1neSsiu,iia,Y_______ ··---~~~~ron Jordan
case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 8 Filed: 01/30/2018 Page 1 of 9

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

vs. CAUSE NO. 17-463

NICHOLAS COATS DEFENDANT

MOTION TO PRODUCE DEFENDANT FOR REVIEW DUE TO WRONGFUL

RELEASE

COMES NOW, the State of Mississippi and moves this Honorable Court

to bring the defendant, Nicholas Coats before this Court for Review Due to

Wrongful Release, and in support thereof, the State would show unto this Court

the following, to wit:

1. In October, 20 I 7, the State of Mississippi appeared before the county

court for a Preliminary Hearing in the above referenced matter. The court

determined that there was sufficient probable cause to bind the aforementioned

matter over to await the action of a Hinds County Grand Jury.

2. Bail was denied under Art. 3, Section (29)(3) as well as the finding of

dangerousness to the community. (Exhibit A).

3. At that time, the Court made it clear that this defendant would be

brought back before the Court for review of factors under Lee v. Lawson, 375

So.2d 1019.

4. A Hinds County Grand Jury met on January 8 - 10, 2018. At no

time prior to, nor during this meeting, did the District Attorney's Office have in its

possession a Grand Jury Case File for the above referenced defendant.
Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 2 of 9

brought back before the court for review of factors under Lee v. Lawson, 375

So.2d 1019.

5. A Hinds County Grand Jury met on January 8 - 10, 2018. At no

time prior to, nor during this meeting, did the District Attorney's Office have in its

possession a Grand Jury Case File for the above referenced defendant.

6. To be clear, the District Attorney's Office only received Mr. Coats file,

along with his co-defendant's files, on January 22, 2018 (Exhibit B).

7. On January 10, 2018, the last day for Grand Jury presentment, this

defendant was released from the Hinds County Detention Center at 5:59 pm,

without any notice to the County Court or the District Attorney's Office.

8. The State asks this Court to review this cause, taking in to consideration

the fact that lead detective, Corey Jenkins had not completed his investigation by

the time the Grand Jury was empaneled. Moreover, the State asks this Court to

consider the fact that the District Attorney's Office did not have in its possession

the case files necessary for presentment of this matter until January 22, 2018.

9. Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 8.5(c). No later than seven

(7) days before the commencement of each term of circuit court in which criminal

cases are adjudicated, the official(s) having custody of felony defendants being

held for trial, grand jury action, or extradition within the county (or within the

county's judicial districts in which the court term is to be held) shall provide the

presiding judge, the district attorney, and the clerk of the circuit court the names of

all defendants in their custody, the charge(s) upon which they are being held, and
Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 3 ot9

the date they were most recently taken into custody. The senior circuit judge, or

such other judge as the senior circuit judge designates, shall review the conditions

of release for every felony defendant who is eligible for bail and has been in jail

for more than ninety (90) days. Rule 8.4 enumerates the· 14 criteria that are

required to be reviewed by the Court in making a determination to release.

I 0. At no time, prior to this defendant's release, was the District Attorney's

Office given notice of hearing for review of the conditions of release. The blanket

authority, given to no specific person or entity, of releasing any prisoner, without

regard to any factor outside a mere counting of days, does not comport with the

Court's obligation to administer its sound reasoning and discretion for each case

under Rule 8.5.

11. The prevailing legal authority in this matter, Lee v. Lawson, at 1021,

states:

"Article 3, Section 29 of the Mississippi Constitution of 1890 reads: "Excessive

bail shall not be required, and all persons shall, before conviction, be bailable by
sufficient sureties, except for capital offenses when the proof is evident or
presumption great."

This constitutional section has been interpreted to provide a non-

discretionary right to bail before conviction for all offenses, except those offenses

punishable by death when the proof of guilt is evident or the presumption of guilt

is great."

12. The facts of this case, coupled with the evidence, will show that the
Case: 25C01:17-cr-00463-WLS Document#: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 4 oL9

defendant has committed a capital offense and the likelihood for conviction in this

matter is great. Therefore, this defendant is not eligible for bond.

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, the State respectfully asks that

this Defendant's bond be revoked due to bond ineligibility, and that he be held without

bond.

The State further asks this Court expedite the hearing on the Motion to be

heard as soon as possible.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this the pt day of February, 2018.

Case: 25C01:17~cr-00463-WLS Document#: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 5 of 9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Pat McNamara, Assistant District Attorney, do hereby certify that I have this

date emailed a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Motion to

DAMON STEVENSON
Defense Attqrne;r
dru:nort~stev~11@gI1iaiLconi

This the pt day of February, 2018.

Patrick McNamara

From: Patrick McNamara

Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 6:57 PM
Subject: FW: MOTION THAT MUST BE HEARD BY THE SENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGE
Attachments: REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED REVIEW.pdf

From: Tamie Green

Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 6:03 PM
To: Patrick McNamara
Cc: Frances Ashley; Greens Staff Attorney; Robert Smith; damon.steven@gmail.com
Subject: FW: MOTION THAT MUST BE HEARD BY THE SENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGE

Mr. McNamara,
The court cannot address this matter as filed or under Rule 8.Sc. You may consider recalling the grand jury ASAP and
presenting the case for indictment. Once the case is indicted, a circuit judge will be assigned. You can then request that
the circuit judge review or reconsider Coats release.

Justice is not just an option in our courts. It is an obligation.

Tamie T. Green, Senior Circuit Judge
Seventh Circuit District
State of Mississippi
P.O. Box 327
Jackson, MS 39205
(601) 968-6658(0ffice)
(601)714-6270 (Fax)
tgreen@co.hinds.ms.us<mailto:tgreen@co.hinds.ms.us>

From: Frances Ashley

Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 5:52 PM
To: Tamie Green
Subject: FW: MOTION THAT MUST BE HEARD BY THE SENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGE

From: Patrick McNamara

Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 2:18 PM
To: Frances Ashley
Cc: Damon Stevenson; Shaunte Washington; roycesmithl@aol.com<mailto:roycesmith1@ao1.com>
Subject: MOTION THAT MUST BE HEARD BY THE SENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGE

Good Afternoon. After being notified the earlier motion was not Judge Green's case I have made some revisions to the
original motion. As the new criminal rules discuss and mandate the procedures for releasing prisoners pre-trial, it is
apparent that the Senior Circuit Judge is the final authority on such releases. Therefore, I believe the motion is properly
before the Court. I respectfully request a hearing on may be heard by the Court.
Thank you.

Pat McNamara
Hinds Co. ADA

This E-mail may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information intended only for the individual or entity
named in the message. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver it
to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is prohibited. If this communication was received in error, please notify us by reply E-mail and delete the
original message.

2
 lob

MINUTES CIRCUIT COURT, 1ST DISTRICT, HINDS COUNTY $fp ~ 3

-------___..:::....::..:___ _ TERM, 20___'.._

IN THE CIRCUlT COURT OF THE FIRST/SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRJCT OF

F I t ED HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
SEP 2 4 2013 NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
BARBARA DUNN, CIRCUIT CLERK
BL.__________ O.C.
IN RE: PERSONS ARRESTED, CHARGED WITH A FELONY AND DETAINED IN JAIL
IN EXCESS OF 90 DAYS WITHOUT ISSUANCE OF INDICTMENTS

ORDER OF PROCEDURE FOR BOND REVIEW OF UNINDICTED DETAINEES

Our Mississippi Constitution states that an accused is "innocent" until proven guilty

In order to comply-with constitutional mandates against arresting and detaining individuals for

unreasonable and indefinite periods of time without formal indictment, and in accordance with

the grand jury's findings·in its September 13, 2013 report,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that when an accused is arrested on a

felony charge, and is held without bond or fails and is ,unable to make bail his/her case shall be

presented for indictment before a Hinds County grand jury within ninety (90) days of his date of

incarceration. Should the prosecutor fail to present said accused's case to the grand jury for

indictment within the ninety (90) day time frame, then the Prosecutor shall appear at a bond

review hearing before the senior circuit judge to show good cause why the accused should

remain incarcerated, without indictment having been issued. Any indigent accused shall be

represented by the Public Defender of Hinds County.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Hinds County District Attorney

shall, simultane s with his filing with circuit clerk, deliver to the Senior Circuit Court Judge of

Hinds Co ty and the Hinds County Sheriff a docket of all INDICTMENTS and NO BILLS.

Ves1 Bookbinding E1300569LD

 SEP 2 °1 Wl3 157
MINUTES CIRCUIT COURT, 1ST DISTRICT, HINDS C O U N T Y - - - - - - - - - - - - - TERM, 20--,,.--,,
SEP j 3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Hinds County Sheriff shall on or

about the last day of each month, beginning the last day of October, 2013 and continuing on the

last date of every month thereafter, deliver to the Senior Circuit Judge and the Hinds County

District Attorney, a jail docket kept pursuant to Mississippi law, of all persons who are being

detained in the jails of Hinds County or who are detained in some convenient county jail

pursuant to Section 47-3-1, Miss. Code Ann. (l 97~) for more than 90 days of their arrest,

without an indictment having been issued.

The Circuit Clerk of Hinds Countv shall send an attested copy of the herein order to the

Sheriff of Hinds County. all mayors. municipal judges and police chiefs of all citv and

towns in Hinds Countv, all members of the Hinds Countv Board of Supervisors, the

County Administrator. the Hinds Countv District Attorney and the Hinds Countv Public

Defender.

SOORDE~D~DADJU~=L
TOMIE GREEN, SENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGE

Vest Bookbinding E1300569LD

Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00463-WLS Document #: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 1 of 9
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00463-WLS Document #: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 2 of 9
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00463-WLS Document #: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 3 of 9
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00463-WLS Document #: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 4 of 9
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00463-WLS Document #: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 5 of 9
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00463-WLS Document #: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 6 of 9
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00463-WLS Document #: 9 Filed: 02/01/2018 Page 7 of 9
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00525-WLS Document #: 2 Filed: 10/31/2017 Page 1 of 2
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00525-WLS Document #: 2 Filed: 10/31/2017 Page 2 of 2
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00463-WLS Document #: 4 Filed: 10/03/2017 Page 1 of 2
Case: 25CO1:17-cr-00463-WLS Document #: 4 Filed: 10/03/2017 Page 2 of 2