morion_A~ IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO, 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, Ryan Alexander Dukes, Defendant, MOTION FOR RULE 22 HEARING PRIOR TO FILMING BY THE MEDIA RYAN ALEXANDER DUKES, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an order FOR A HEAING BEFORE THIS COURT PRIOR TO ANY FILMING, VIDEOTAPING, OR PHOTOGRAPHY AND SHOWS THE COURT AS FOLLOWS: 1. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKES faces the potential imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole, In light of the heightened interest of the media to film and take pictures of the the Defendant, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKES submits that, among the “extraordinary measures” that the Court should take to ensure due provess and the reliability of the trial and possible sentencing proceedings in this case, the Court should order that RYAN. ALEXANDER DUKES be permitted to wear normal, “civilian” clothing without visible restraint during all court proceedings, and in all situations in which RYAN ALEXANDER DUKES may be viewed by the press, jury venire ,and trial jury. People who are traveling to and from court on the streets around the courthouse in the area where inmates are being brought in, including potential jurors, are frequently exposed to inmates dressed in distinctive jail garb, restrained with Sopapy oun Courytype of equipment to be used in the courtroom; the trial, hearing, or proceeding to be covered; and the person responsible for installation and operation of such equipment “, USCR 22, 8, on the issues. 9. Further the Rule requires notice to all parties and counsels of record and a hearing OCGA. 15-1-10.1 sets out the factors to be considered by the court in determining grant of requests for tclevising, videotaping or motion picture filming of judicial proceedings.(sve exhibit “B” attached). 10. WHEREFORE, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE respectfully requests that (a) the Court require notice of the Media's intent to record or film to all counsel of record at the same time notice is sent to the court.; (b) this Court issue an order for a rule 22 hearing upon receipt of such notice to allow Defendant an opportunity to raise his 5 and 6" amendment objections to said recording, on the occasions when RVAN ALEXANDER DUKE is in court, (©) that the Court conduct 2 timely hearing and issue a finding if facts and conclusions of law addressing any Rule 22 maters raised by the Defendant Walker. (@) that RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE have such other relief as is proper in this matter. John R. Mobley Tt Chief Public Defender ‘Tif Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. DukeIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA > STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, d ) v ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant. ) — CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attorney for IRWIN County via __ First-class United States mail via the Postal Service; or ‘Hand delivery to the District Attorney's Office; or ™ Personal service upon the District Attomey in Court; This the ae cnyot Meg rol. H. Burton Baier Ga. Bar No, 033500 Trial Lawyer Office of the Georgia Capital Defender P.O. Box 1909 Tifton Georgia (229) 386-3640 fax 229-386-3642 boaker@gacapdet.orgMOTION No IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, } Pain, }vprerent no, 2017cR027 y } RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE , } Defendant. MOTION FOR COMPLETE RECORDATION AND TRANSCRIPT OF ALL PRE-TRIAL AND TRIAL PROCEEDINGS, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to order complete recording of all pretrial and trial proceedings in this ease. This motion is predicated upon the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 1, $1, I, IV, V, VI, IX, X, XI, XI, XIL, XIV, XV1, XVI, XVIN, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, intemational treaties and customary international law, Rules I(A)(3) and [V(A)(1) of, and the Note to, the Unified Appeal Outline of Proceedings, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. 1. ‘The right of a defendant to have complete recordation and a complete transcript of the criminal proceedings against him is a right recognized by the Federal system, the State of Georgia, and by other states. The transcript provides both a complete record of the proceedings and the basis an appellate court will use to review the case and rule upon any alleged errors, raised during an appeal from a conviction. The absence of a complete recordation and transcript “effectively deprives the defendant of his right to appeal” because inherent in the right of @672, 273 S.E.2d 9, 12 (1980) (“in view of [the Georgia Supreme Court's) responsibility of the appellate review of eases in which the death penalty was imposed, an accurate and complete transcript is essential” Montford v. State 164 Ga.App. 627, 629, 298 S.E.2d 319, 320 (1982). 4, The complete recordation of these proceedings is essential to ensuring the reliability and accuracy of the determination whether RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE is innocent or guilty of the crimes alleged, and the determination of the appropriate punishment in the event of conviction. The right to complete recordation is likewise protected by international treaties and customary law, which recognize the right of meaningful access to the courts, For example, the United States has signed and ratified multilateral instruments, such as the ICCPR and the American Declaration on Human Rights that require it, as a matter of law, to provide detainees with effective access to the courts. See, e.g, Intemational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, G.A. res, 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966), 999 U.N-TS. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976, art. 9(4)(“Anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that the court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of her detention and order her release if the detention is not lawful.”); American Dectaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, art. 18, OAS Res, XXX, O.AS. Rec. OEA/Ser.L/V/L4 (1945)(“Telvery person may resort to the courts to ensure respect for his legal rights."). See also Body of Principles, Principle 32 (“A detained person or her counsel shall be entitled at any time to take proceedings according to domestic Jaw before a judicial or other authority to challenge the lawfulness of his detention. . . The proceedings . .. shall be simple and expeditious. ..”); American Convention on Human Rights art, 7(6)(*[a]ayone who is deprived of his liberty shall be entitled to recourse to a competent court, in order that the court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his arrest or+ all pre-trial hearings; + the selection of the jurors, including challenges for cause; + the voir dire examination and the striking; + the opening statements and closing arguments of counsel; + the examination of the witnesses; + all documentary evidence, including photographs; + all oral motions (whether pre-trial, during trial or after trial) and all hearings on oral and written motions; + alloral objections and all hearings on oral and written objections; + all conferences and hearings of every description and for every purpose conducted between court and counsel, including all bench and chamber conferences; + all oral stipulations of counsel; + the charges of the court to the jury during the guiltinnocence and sentencing phases of the proceeding + the publication of the verdiet and the polling of the jury; + the pronouncement of sentence; + all oral comments, instructions, directions, admonitions, rulings and orders of the court in the case from the first proceeding through conclusion of the trial; and + all post-trial proceedings, including any proceedings relating to sentencing and any post-trial motions hearings. ‘The record should also include: + all contacts between the jury and any other person, except for contacts explicitly and carefully allowed by the trial court, at a hearing, after consultation with defense counsel; + any and all questions or written statements made by jurors, and any responses issued by the Court.MOTION No.__ IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017CR027 ) vw ) ) RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE , ) ) Defendant, ) ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attomey for IRWIN County via ‘irst-class United States mail via the Postal Service; or and delivery to the District Attomey's Office; or ~" Personal service upon the District Attomey in Court; ~ DATED this _% day of 2018 H. Bunton Baker Assistant Public Defender IRWINon Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500all oral stipulations of counsel; the charges of the court to the jury during the guilt-innocence and sentencing phases of the proceedings; the publication of the verdict and the polling of the jury; the pronouncement of sentence; and all oral comments, instructions, directions, admonitions, rulings and orders of the court in the case from the first proceeding through conclusion of the trial, IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED AND DECREED, that the following proceedings and events in this case shall also be recorded and transcribed: all contacts between the jury and any other person, except for contacts explicitly and carefully allowed by the tial court, at a hearing, after consultation with defense counsel; and any and all questions or written statements made by jurors, and any responses thereto by the Court, SO ORDERED the ____dayof____ 20, Prepared by: Judge Hon. Bill Reinhart IRWIN County Superior Court H. Burton Baker, Ga. Bar No. 033500 Attomey for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE.IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OFI RWIN COUNTY, STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, Plaintiff, INDICTMENT NO, 2017CRO27 RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, Defendant. MOTION FOR AN ORDER PROVIDING IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO ALL PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AS WELL AS TO PRESERVE ALL EVIDENCE AND PRECLUDE ANY ADDITIONAL STATE TESTING OR EXAMINATION OF EVIDENCE THAT WOULD ALTER, REDUCE, OR DESTROY EVIDENCE, WITHOUT NOTICE TO THE DEFENSE AND PRIOR COURT APPROVAL RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an order directing the District Attomey, the Police Department, the Sheriff's Department, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, and all other relevant agencies to preserve, retain intact, and not destroy or alter any evidence, tangible papers, objects, or other materials or items relating in any manner to this case. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE further requests that this Court order the State’ not to conduct any further tests or examinations that would alter, reduce, or destroy such evidence, without notice to the defense and prior court approval. This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 1, $41, Hl IV, V, VI, IX, X, XI, XH, XIII, XIV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, O.C.G.A. § 17-5- 56, intemational treaties and customary law, evolving international standards, and the jurisprudential authority cited herein. Fijed in Offi fotos.O.C.G.A. § 17-5-55 provides as follows: (@ In all criminal cases, the court shall designate the clerk of court, the court reporter, or any other officer of the court to be the custodian of any property that is introduced into evidence during the pendency of the case, Property introduced into evidence shall be identified or tagged with an exhibit number. After verdict and judgment has been entered in any criminal case, the person who has custody of the physical evidence introduced in the case shall inventory the evidence and create an evidence log within 30 days of the entry of the judgment, Within 30 days following the creation of the evidence log, physical evidence shall be returned to the rightful owner of the property untess the physical evidence itself is necessary for the appeal of the case, for a new trial, or for purposes of complying with this Code section or Code Section 17-5-6. The evidence log shall contain the case number, style of the case, description of the item, exhibit number, the name of the person creating the evidence log, and the location where the physical evidence is stored. After the evidence log is completed, the judge shall designate the clerk of court, the prosecuting attomey, or the law enforcement agency involved in prosecuting the case to obtain and store the evidence, and a notation shall appear in the evidence log indicating the transfer of evidence. If evidence is transfered to any other party, the evidence log shall be annotated to show the identity of the person or entity receiving the evidence, the date of the transfer, and the location of the evidence. The signature of any person or entity to which physical evidence is transferred shall be captured through electronic means that will be linked to the evidence log or the use of a property transfer form that will be filed with the evidence log. When physical evidence, other than audio or video recordings, is transferred to any person or entity, a photograph or other visual image of the evidence shall be made and placed in the case file. (0) Physical evidence classified as dangerous or contraband by state or federal law, including, but not limited to, items described by state or federal law as controlled substances, dangerous drugs, explosives, weapons, ammunition, biomedical waste, hazardous substances, or hazardous waste shall be properly secured in a manner authorized by state or federal law. This evidence may be transferred to a goverment agency authorized (o store ot dispose of the material. (©) Documents, photographs, and similar evidence shall be maintained and disposed of in accordance with records retention schedules adopted in accordance with Article 5 of Chapter 18 of Title 50, known as the “Georgia Records Act.” Other physical evidence that contains biological material, including, but not limited to, stains, fluids, or hair samples that relate to the identity of the perpetrator of the crime, shall be maintained in accordance with Code Section 17- 5-56. (@) Except as is otherwise provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this Code section or by law, following the expiration of the period of time set forth in subsections (b) and (c) of this Code section, physical evidence may be disposed of incase, including, but not limited to, a law enforcement agency or a prosecuting attorney, shall maintain any physical evidence collected at the time of the erime that contains biological material, including, but not limited to, stains, fluids, or bais samples that relate to the identity of the perpetrator of the crime as provided in this Code section. Biological samples collected directly from any person for use as reference materials for testing or collected for the purpose of drug or alcohol testing shall not be preserved. (b) In a case in which the death penalty is imposed, the evidence shall be ‘maintained until the sentence in the case has been carried out. In a case that involves the prosecution of a serious violent felony as defined by Code Section 17-10-6.1, the evidence that contains biological material, including but not limited to, stains, fluids, or hair samples that relate (o the identity of the perpetrator of the ccime shall be maintained for ten years after judgment in the criminal case becomes final or ten years after May 27, 2003, whichever is later. Evidence in all other felony and misdemeanor cases may be purged. OCGA. § 17-5-56. ‘Thus, the State has a statutory duty to preserve biological evidence for a period of at least ten years after the judgment becomes final, or, if a death sentence is imposed, until the death sentence is actually carried out. While the statute explicitly sets forth duties that relate to the custody and preservation of evidence at and after trial, the law necessarily proscribes the destruction of biological evidence. 8. In California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479 (1984), the United States Supreme Court considered two factors when examining the state's duty to preserve evidence: (1) whether the state agents acted ‘“in good faith und in accord with their normal practice,” 467 U.S. at 488, and (2) whether the evidence in question “might be expected to play a significant role in the suspect's, defense.” Id, For evidence to be “expected to play a significant role in the suspect’s defense,” it “must both possess an exculpatory value .... and be of such a nature that the defendant would be tunable to obtain comparable evidence by other reasonably available means.” Id, at 489. 9. The procedural posture of this case, however, is very different than the situation the United States Supreme Court faced. ‘Irombetts analyzed the situation where the evidenceremaining portion of presently existing samples and effectively preclude the defense from obtaining independent testing in violation of the independent state and federal constitutional ‘guarantees to a fair trial, cross-examination and confrontation of adverse witnesses, the effective assistance of counsel, due process of law, and a reliable verdict and sentence. Ga. Const, art. 1, § 1, 4, M, 1Y, V, VIL, 1X, X, Xf, XU, XII, XIV, XVI, XVI, XVI, XXIV and XXVIII; U.S. Const. amend. V, VI, VIII and XIV. 12. Without access to as much of the original evidence as is possible, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE will be unable to properly investigate this matter, fairly and competently examine the evidence, and adequately review the results of the various State experts. The independent state and federal constitutional guarantees to a fair trial, cross-examination and confrontation of adverse witnesses, the effective assistance of counsel, due process of law, and a reliable verdict and sentence require the State preserve all of the evidence in this case, and not conduct testing of the evidence that would alter, reduce, or destroy any evidence without prior notice to the defense and court approval, Ga, Const. art. I, §1, 91, Hl, 1V, V, VI, IX, X, XI, XI, XIIL, XIV, XVI, XVI, XVII, XXIV and XXVUI; U.S. Const. amend. V, VI, Vill and XIV. WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons and any others that may appear to this Court after a hearing, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE respectfully requests this Court to (\)order the State to preserve all evidence and not to conduct tests or examinations that would alter, reduce or destroy any evidence without notice to the defense and prior Court approval and (Qjorder the State to provide immediate access to all physical evidence to RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE in order to conduct independent inspection and testing.IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) ) “ ) ) Ryen Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ‘CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been mailed to The Office of the g Djstrict Attomey for IRWIN County via hand-delivery this 9 day of Aes. ao) f LE a Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar No.033500Motion No. 5 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, Plaintiff, INDICTMENT NO. 2017CR027 v, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE , Defendant. DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, through undersigned counsel, respectfully submits this demand for a jury trial pursuant to the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments 10 the United States Constitution and Article I, § 1, $W ll, IV, V, Vil, IX, X, Xi, XII, XIII, XIV, XVI, XVIL, XVIII, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, In support, counsel states 1, The right to a trial by jury is enshrined in the Georgia and United States Constitutions, Ga, Const. art. 1, § 1, 4] 11 (1983); U.S. Const Amend. 6 & 14, Ms. Hendrickson. Butler hereby invokes that right, and ail attendant constitutional protections and guarantees. WHEREFORE, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE respectfully demands a trial by jury in accordance with the Georgia and United States constitutions and Georgia statutory provisions pertaining to cases which may result in a sentence of life or of life imprisonment without parole. DATED the ge day of _ Age 2018 Respectfully Submitted, Fed in Op soit a 2 stot ‘Ths. Zo i ' Aas "eee eeMotion No. IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY ‘STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, Plaintiff, INDICTMENT NO. 2017CR027 v. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, Defendant. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attomey for IRWIN County via First-class United States mail via the Postal Service; or Liana delivery to the Distt Attorney's Office; or © Personal service upon the District Attorney in Court; patep ins anor thes, 2018 Hf HBurton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tifton Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500MOTION_@ IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY ‘STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, Plaintiff, INDICTMENT NO. 2017CRO27 RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, Defendant, MOTION FOR DISCLOSURE OF DEALS WITH WITNESSES. Ryan Alexander Dukes, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an Order requiring the State to reveal any agreement entered into between the District Attomey's Office or any law enforcement agency and any prosecution witness. This motion is predicated upon the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 1, M1, Hl, IV, V, VIL, IX, X, XI, XI, XML XIV, XV, XVU, XVI, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, international treaties and customary international law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below, In support of this motion, counsel states: 1, A defendant's discovery rights include any impeachment information. Giglio v. United Slates, 405 U.S. 150 (1972). This covers agreements or arrangements with state witnesses whose testimony is material to the proceedings. The Georgia Supreme Court has interpreted Giglio to mean that "the state is under a duty to reveal any agreement with a witness, even an informal one." tate, 251 Ga, 313, 305 S.B.2d 102, 105 (1983). See also Jolley v. State, 254 Ga, 624, 331 S.E.2d 516 (1985). Prior convictions of a witness known to the prosecution must also be revealed to the defense. See Hines v, State, 249 Ga, 257, 290 8.5.24 ijed in Offige a Benen Aimest oe | Tope AM sows Ten Sor ‘ark SopWHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons and any others that may appear to this Court after a hearing, counsel for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, respectfully requests this Court to order the State to reveal to the defense all deals, benefits or promises of benefit, threats, or statements that benefit would not be provided without cooperation that were made to any State witness, and to make diligent inquires of all law enforcement and other agencies and institutions regarding any such agreements or informal agreements made with witnesses for the state and to likewise reveal this information. paren te (7 day of Agi _20». Respectfully Submitted, jet Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit ‘Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No, 514917 Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017CR027 ) ¥ ) ) RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE , ) ) Defendant. 5 ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attorney for Irwin County via ___ First-class United States mail via the Postal Service; or jand delivery to the District Attorney's Office; or Personal service upon the District Attorney in Court; ne ie DATED this {day of Ae-sea 20, H. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr, Duke Ga. Bar No.033500 Fijed in Offi Ths apes Times DA ~ 2g — .orion “7 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA - ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) d INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 ) ) vy. ) ) Ryan Alexander Dukes, ) ) Defendant. d ) MOTION RESERVING THE RIGHT TO FILE ADDITIONAL MOTIONS RYAN ALEXANDER DUKES, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to issue an order reserving his right to file such additional motions as the future progression of this case may merit. This motion is predicated upon the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § f, $11, ll, IV, V, VI, IX, X, XI, XIL, XII, XIV, XVI, XVIL, XVII, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, international treaties and customary international law, as well as statutory and Jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: 1. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKES js facing the possibility of the imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. 2. Both formal and informal discovery are ongoing and incomplete. Problems with the availability of requested information, as well as questions regarding the propriety of revealing certain information maintained by the prosecution, may arise that will compel RYANIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, Plaintiff, INDICTMENT NO. 2017CRO27 RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE , Defendant. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, Thereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attomey for Irwin County via Bjrst-class United States mail via the Postal Service; or delivery to the District Attomey's Office; or = Personal service upon the District Attomey in Court; Re paren tnis © day of, 2018. H, Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar No.033500 Fyjedin Offgo a1! The. ayo Angst 4 MDS Clo Surf Gaur. Rein Coursmotion IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA. STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, Ryan Alexander Duke, Defendant. Lo MOTION TO RESTRICT USE OF THE WORD "MURDER" Ryan Alexander Duke, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to restrict the District Attomey and the State's witnesses from using the word “murder” prior to a Jury verdict convicting the defendant of that offense. This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, § I, 14 HL IV, V, VII, IX, X, XI, XI, XIN, XIV, XVI, XVI, XVII, XXIV and XXVIT of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, international treaties and customary intemational law, as, ‘well 2s statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: 1. Ryan Alexander Duke is on trial for Malice Murder. Ryan Alexander Duke faces the potential imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. 2, The defendant has been charged with the offense of murder, in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-5-1, The ultimate question for determination by the jury is whether the State can cstablish each and every element of the offense of murder beyond a reasonable doubt. While the statute sets out each element of the crime of murder, the use by the District Attomey or a witness of the word "murder" suggests a conclusion that a murder occurred and has been proven beyond Jed in Offige ce sie cat gon pe Cast ew CoueyCounsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No, 514917 Michael W. Gowen Assistant Public Defender Tift Sudicial Circuit ‘Counsel for Mr. Duke Bie , Hi Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Cireuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, v. Ryan Alexander Duke, Defendant, ORDER Upon consideration of Ryan Alexander Duke's Motion to Restrict Use of the Word "Murder," the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, and good grounds appearing therefore, IT [§ HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED, that, prior to trial, the District Attomey and any and all witnesses called on behalf of the State will be instructed to refrain from the use of the word “murder.” SO ORDERED the____ day of__ 420 Judge Hon. Bill Reinhart Irwin County Superior Court Prepared by: H. Burton Baker, Ga, Bar No, 033500 ‘Atomey for RY AN ALEXANDER DUKEMotion P IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TIFT COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) d Plaintiff, ) INDICTMENT NO, 2017CRO27 d v. ) ) RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE , ) ) Defendant, ) d MOTION FOR AN ORDER REQUIRING THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY ‘TO RESPOND IN WRITING TO EACH MOTION, ‘WHICH IS CONTESTED BY THE STATE Ryan Alexander Dukes, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an order directing the District Attomey to respond in writing to cach motion filed by counsel for Ryan Alexander Dukes which is to be contested by the State. This motion is predicated upon the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, § 1, 11, UL, IV, V, VIL, IX, X, XI, XI, XIM, XIV, XVI, XVI, XVIL, XXIV and XVI of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, intemational treaties and customary international law, as, well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support of this motion, counsel states: 1. Ryan Alexander Dukes faces a sentence of potential life without parole. 2. A motion is a request of the Court for a specific form of relief, Virtually every jurisdiction recognizes the use of the motion to address issues relevant to either the prosecution or defense of a criminal case. Several reasons exist for requiring the prosecution to respond in writing to each motion filed by the defense, and to require that the prosecution cite the authorities on which they rely. 3. Judicial Eeonomy: First, there are considerations of judicial economy. ‘There are Filed in Offi X AM, 2 \etnony ST om Bark Supe pt) Cou Bw Coonty‘goose is sauce for the gander.” Alcerte v, McGinnis, 898 F.2d 69, 72 (7 Cir. 1990). “[T]he Due Process Clause . .. forbids enforcement of . . . rules unless reciprocal rights are given to criminal defendants.” Wardius v. Oregon, 412 U.S. 470, 472 (1973). For this reason, procedural rules have been applied with equal force against the prosecution as against the defense, See, e.8., Wilson v, O"Leary, 895 F.2d 378, 384 (7 Cir. 1990); Alcerte v, MeGinnis, 898 F.2d at 71-72; Russell v. Rolls, 893 F.2d 1033, 1038 (9" Cir, 1990); Francis v. Rison, 894 F.2d 353, 355 (9 Cir. 1990); Cole v. Young, 817 F.2d 412, 415 (7 Cir. 1987); Merlo v. Bolden, 801 F.2d 252, 255 (6% Cir. 1986); Barrera v. Young, 794 F.2d 1264, 1267-68 (7 Cir. 1986); Boykins v. Wainwright, 737 F.2d 1539, 1545 (11"" Cir. 1984); see also Hitchcock v. Dugger, 481 U.S. 393, 399 (1987) (waiver of harmless error by failing to raise it) 8. Therefore, unless the prosecution atiomeys announce what their position is, and why, they will be defaulted from arguing varying positions on any appeal. This is only fair — when the accused loses by default, he or she dies; when the prosecution loses by default, the State may still get to keep Ryan Alexander Dukes in prison under a life sentence without the possibility of parole. 9. Citation of Authority: Courts require parties to “support propositions of law with reasons and authorities.” Pate v. State, 419 So.2d 1324, 1325-26 (Miss. 1982). ‘This not only ensures notice and faimess to the opposing party, but protects the Court from being misled into committing errors of law, especially reversible ones. The State must also provide authority in this case. Therefore, unless the prosecution cites authority in responses, this Court should rule that the prosecution waived their opportunity to argue to the Court that the motion should not be granted: [The} rules apply to the goverment as well as to defendants. [The State] has forfeited what would have been its best argument. If as a result a violent offender goes free, the (state prosecutor] must understand where the responsibility lies — with his own staff. Wilson v. O'Leary, 895 F.2d at 384; accord Alerte v. McGinnis, 898 F.2d at 72 ("the state hasthe court and respect its authority, as well as maintain public confidence in the judicial system and the legal profession ibama, 571 F.Supp. 958 (N.D. Ala. 1983); American Bar Association, Standards of Criminal Justice §3-1.2(b); Adams v. State, 198 So. 2d 255 (Ala, 1967) (the primary duty of the office of the District Attomey is to sce that justice is done). 14, The role of the public prosecutor has long been recognized as a special one: ‘The responsibility of a public prosecutor differs from that of the usual advocate; his duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict. This special duty exists because: (1) the prosecutor represents the sovereign and therefore should use restraint in the discretionary exercise of governmental powers, such as in the selection of cases to prosecute; (2) during the trial, the prosecutor is not only an advocate but he also may make decisions normally made by an individual client, and those affecting the public interest should be fair to all; and (3) in our system of criminal justice the accused is to be given the benefits of all reasonable doubts Georgia Code of Professional Responsibility, EC 7-13, see alsa, Burns v. State, 172 Ga.App. 645, 324 S.E.2d 197 (1984); American Bar Association, Standards, 3-1.2(c) (prosecutor has responsibility to guard the rights of the accused as well as those of society at large); American Bar Association, Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 3.8 comment (1}; OCGA. § 15-18-2 (oath requiring district attomey to discharge duties faithfully and impartially). 15, ‘The District Attorney and his or her assistants have an obligation to respond to each defense motion ifthe State intends to oppose the relief requested therein. To wait until the motions hearings and then orally respond fails to satisfy the obligations placed upon the prosecutor to actively address 's appeals for relief from violations of his constitutional rights. If the State has 2 legitimate interest in objecting to a particular motion, then the prosecutor should set forth his opposition to those requests in such a timely manner that the defense may be prepared to respond to the State’s argument and cited authority.IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TIFT COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, Plaintiff, INDICTMENT NO. 2017CR027 RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE , Defendant, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attorney for Irwin County via lass United States meil via the Postal Service; or Hand delivery to the District Attomey’s Office; or * Personal service upon the District Attomey in Court; i DATED this} dayof Ag Hi Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tifton Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500 Filed in oe sinte a amoron # | INTHE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY, STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, ) Plaintiff, } Indictment No, 2017-CR-027 ¥ ) RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE } Defendant. MOTION TO DISMISS THE INDICTMENT DUE TO THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL COMPOSITION OF THE GRAND JURY RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to quash the indictment against him because of the improper, unauthorized, arbitrary, and discriminatory method used to select the grand jury in this case, thereby causing the systematic underrepresentation of cognizable groups of persons who are eligible to serve as grand jurors. Additionally, defendant challenges the methods used by the Jury Commissioners to select the grand jury, as well as issues regarding the failure of grand jurors to appear in response to the summons issued by the County. This motion is predicated upon the Fifth, Sixth, Bighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article [, § 1, WJ, Il, IV, V, VIL, IX, X, XI, XIl, XUIL, XIV, XVI, XVII, XVII, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, international treaties and customary intemational law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support of this motion, counsel states: 1. The Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and ‘Asticle I, Section I, Paragraphs I, II, and XI of the Georgia Constitution guarantee every criminalto be excluded from juries based on his or her group membership. See Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 84 (1986) (denying participation in a jury on the basis of race is in violation of the Equal Protection Clause}; Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co, 500 U.S. 614, 618 (1991) (“a criminal defendant... may object to a prosecutor's race-based exclusion of persons from the petit jury”); Georg lum, 505 U.S. 42, 47-48 (1992) (“in a trial of a white criminal defendant, a MeColh prosecutor is prohibited from excluding African-American jurors on the basis of race”); J.E.B. Alabama, 511 U.S. 127, 134 (1994) (removal of male jurors on the basis of sex is prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause). Each of these preceding cases emphasized the right of every individual to participate in the jury service and established a per se right of potential jurors not to be excluded based on “state-sponsored group stereotypes.” J.E.B. v, Alabama, 511 U.S. at 128. ‘The values supporting a defendant's right to receive a fair and impartial jury and the jurors’ right to nondiscriminatory selection support one another and both are necessary to achieve the goals of impartiality, accuracy, and legitimacy in the jury selection system. 3. In order to protect the constitutional right to an impartial jury and nondiscriminatory jury selection, federal courts require that juries be “selected at random from a fair cross-section of the community.” Federal Jury Selection and Service Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1861 1878 (2014). Furthermore, a majority of states follow the federal example and also mandate that Juries be randomly selected. See WAYNE R. LAFAVE & JEROLD H. ISRAEL, CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, § 22.2(b), pg. 963 (2d. ed. 1992). In Georgia, the process for selecting grand jurors has recently changed. Beginning on July 1, 201, the Council of Superior Court Clerks has been charged with creating a state-wide master jury list from which both grand and petit jurors are to be selected. O.C.G.A. §15-12-40.1(a). This list shall include names of eligible jurors compiled from records obtained from the Georgia Department of Driver Services and the Georgia Secretary of State'sthe method chosen by Congress-is to put together a complete list of eligible jurors and select randomly from it, on the assumption that the laws and statistics will produce representative juties most of the time. This approach safeguards the selection process from possible manipulation and ensures the independence of the jury. 14. (quoting Holland v. Illinois, 493 U.S. 474 (1990); see also Larmon v State, 256 Ga. 228, 228-29, 345 8.E.2d 587, 588 (1986); Parks v, State 254 Ga, 403, 512-413, n. 5, 330 S.E.24 686, 694 (1985). As such, any unauthorized interference or manipulation of the random jury selection method vitiates the array of the grand jury, resulting in reversible error. 6. All of the constitutional and statutory provisions mentioned above were clearly established to regulate the selection, drawing, and summoning of jurors in order to ensure that the defendant receives a fair and impartial jury and that no distinct, cognizable groups in the community are exchided. “A disregard of the essential and substantial provisions of the statute will have the effect of vitiating the array” in violation of the statutory provisions governing the ‘grand jury selection process, Meders v. State, 260 Ga. 49, 53, 389 S.B.2d 320, 323 (1990). ‘Therefore, a trial court is not free to disregard statutory requirements substantive in nature and institute a different method of empaneling juries, no matter how superior or efficient a different method may be. Jd. When statutory selection procedures are violated, prejudice is presumed, Yates v. Stale, 274 Ga. 312, 315, 553 S,B.2d 563, 566 (2001). 7. Upon information and belief, the master list from which Ryan Alexander Duke's ‘grand jury was selected was not properly compiled in accordance with statutory procedures ‘governing compilation of the grand jury lists. At this time, Mr, Duke’s counsel has not received from the office of the Clerk of Superior Court the information necessary to determine whether or rot the jury list was properly compiled, As such, undersigned counsel, therefore, expressly reserves the right to supplement this motion with additional information as it becomes available.10, In 1976, the Georgia General Assembly explicitly codified qualifications for grand jurors stating that felons that had not had their civil rights restored would be ineligible to serve on a grand jury. O.C.G.A, §15-12-60. ). The Georgia Supreme Court later determined that 0.0.G.A. §15-12-60, passed in 1976, did not render jurors convicted of a felony before July 1, 1976 incompetent serve. Gunn v. State, 245 Ga. 359, 360-61 (1980). The Gunn Court determined that since the 1976 Act did not exhibit any legislative intent to be applied retroactively to all felony conviction prior to 1976 that they would not so apply it. Id. As such, pursuant to Gunn, jurors with felony convictions before 1976 should also be included in the jury pool. I, The Georgia Supreme Court later held that under 0.C.G.A. §15-12-60 did not require the exclusion of jurors with convictions fiom other states or the federal system unless statute explicitly requires it. Clark v, State, 255 Ga. 370, 371 (1986). The court reasoned “a juror convicted of a criminal offense in another state, or in the federal system, will not be disqualified as a juror in the absence of an express statute disqualifying such an individual as a juror for such reason.” Id. The Court also affirmed the holding of Gunn, explaining that 0.C.G.A. §15-12-60 “does not apply to convictions rendered prior to 1976." Id 12. Any reading of OCGA § 15-12-40 as mandating the exclusion of convicted felons from jury service whose convictions occurred prior to July 1, 1976 would render OCGA § 15-12— 40 repugnant to Constitutions of both Georgia and the United States in that it would violate the ex post facto clauses of both the state and federal constitutions as provided in Article I, Section I, Paragraph X of the Constitution of the State of Georgia and Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution of the United States of America by adding an additional punishments fora prior erime that did not exist at the time of its commission.” 2 Service om & txal jar isa fundamental civil right, The United States Supreme Court has cecognized that jury duty in general is aright, a Galy, and an opportunity to contribute to civic life and to participate in theconstitute distinc, identifiable, cognizable groups. 15. At this time, Mr, Duke’s counsel has not received from the office of the Clerk of Superior Court the information necessary to determine whether or uot: (1) the jury venite from which Ryan Alexander Duke's, grand jury was selected systematically underrepresented the various classifications of potential jurors in proportion to these groups’ representation in IRWIN County; (2) based upon the census data, the aforementioned groups are underrepresented and therefore are not 85% inclusive of the number of persons in the county population age 18 and Census Bureau for the calendar year in which the list was generated.” Jury Composition Rule, $B; G) underrepresentation of cognizable groups of potentially eligible grand jurors from the grand jury poo! is statistically significant and unreasonable in relation to the number of such persons in IRWIN County; and/or (4) there is a significant and constitutionally impermissible underrepresentation of he underrepresented groups on the gran jury ist in this ease 16. In order to prepare and present evidence on this motion and to litigate these claims adequately, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE must have access to and copies of all materials and information used for the compilation and selection of the grand jury pool in IRWIN County, all of which are in the possession and control of the Clerk of IRWIN County Superior Court. Ryan Alexander Duke's, right to inspect and copy these, materials is beyond dispute, ‘Test v. United States, 420 U.S. 28, 30 (1975) (there is an essentially “unqualified right” to inspect jury lists). WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons and any others that may appear to this Court after ahearing, counsel for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE respectfully requests the following: ‘Order the Clerk of the IRWIN County Superior Court to make available to Ryan Alexanderif, Brion Baker Assistant Public Defender Tifton Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500 Counsel for Ryan Alexander Duke uATTACHMENT 1 1, The IRWIN County just list effective July 1, 2014 received from the Council of Superior Court Clerks in electronic and data accessible form. 2, The jury list as implemented by IRWIN County on its intemal system that will be used to summon jurors in this case. The data should include all information and codes that identify the jurors who are eligible to be selected as a juror in this case. The data should be in electronic and data accessible form. 3. __A layout of the jury list as implemented by IRWIN County (item #2) that identifies all of the fields and identifies all of the codes used. 4. A description of any process that alters any data received from the Council of Superior Court Clerks (item #1). 5. A description of any process completed by any vendor on the jury list. 6. A description of any process completed by IRWIN County on the jury list. 7. The IRWIN County Administrative Order regarding Jury Management that is in effect for the jury list, 8, Any other instructions or specifications regarding the creation and use of the jury list in IRWIN County including instructions or specifications for any vendors.County District Attomey’s Office the documents listed in Attachment 1 to this Order. SO ORDERED this__dayof__— ‘The Honorable Bill Reinhart Judge, IRWIN County Superior Court State of Georgia Prepared by: H. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tifton Judicial Cirouit ‘Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga Bar No.03350010. convicted felons who have not had their civil rights restored, as described in Appendix A of the Jury Composition Rule, ‘The source data that is secured from the Superior Court Clerk regarding persons who are permanently excused as described in Appendix A of the Jury Composition Rule, Any and all statistical analyses of the statewide and county master jury lists done bby the Council of Superior Court Clerks or its vendor. ‘Any and all written procedures, memoranda, instructions or rules promulgated by and used by the Council of Superior Court Clerks and its vendors. ‘Any and all names and contact information for individuals at the Council of Superior Court Clerks or its vendor who have any meaningful responsibilities with the construction of the statewide and county master jury lists. Additionally, the data items shall be in an electronic format that allows analysis of the data, SO ORDERED this___day of 2015. Prepared by: The Honorable Bill Reinhart IRWIN County Superior Court State of Georgia H. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tifton Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga Bar No.033500Motion No.) IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, Plaintiff, INDICTMENT NO. 2017CRO27 w RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, Defendant. MOTION FOR AN ORDER PROHIBITING RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE FROM BEING EXHIBITED IN JAIL CLOTHING RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an order prohibiting RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE's appearance in this courthouse while dressed in jail clothing or chains. ‘This motion is made pursuant to the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to'the Constitution of the United States and to Article 1, § 1, 991, 2, 7, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 24, and 25 of the Constitution of the State of Georgia. In support of this motion, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE show as follows: 1 RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE submits that the Court should take to ensure due process and the reliability of the trial and possible sentencing proceedings in this case, the Court should order thet RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE be permitted fo wear normal, “civilian” clothing during ll court proceedings, and in all situations in which RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE may be viewed by the jury venire and trial jury. People who are traveling to and from court on the ‘streets around the courthouse in the area where inmates are being brought in, including potential jurors, are frequently exposed to inmates dressed in distinctive jail garb, restrained with heavy Fijed in Offige day of Ths,chains. 2, Forcing RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE to appear in court in jail garb and/or chains is manifestly prejudicial to RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE’s rights to due process and a fair trial. Compelting an accused to wear identifiable prison clothing during his trial violates the Due Process Clause, because it furthers no essential state interest, and “the constant reminder of the accused's condition im) tly in such distinctive, identifiable attire may affect a juror's Judgment,” Estelle v, Williams, 425 U.S. $01, 504-05, 96 S.Ct. 1691 (1976). In addition, it ‘impairs the presumption of innocence, which is a “basic component of a fair trial under our system of criminal justice.” Id, at $03. Accord Gates v, State, 244 Ga. 587, 593, 261 S.E.24 349 (1979) ("Absent justifying circumstances, the defendant normally should not be seen by the jury handcuffed in the courtroom or courthouse"). 3. While the State may argue that the jail uniform and chains are a requirement of ‘general security measures, it is anticipated that the courtroom will be sealed with a number of armed guards encircling RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE as he sits at a table awaiting his ‘opportunity for a fair trial. 4, In the event that RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE is exposed to the jury venire or the trial jury wearing a jail unifocm or chains, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE further requests that the Court conduct a timely voir dire of the affected veniremen or jurors to ascertain “whether any of the prospective jurors had actually seen RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE while he was shackled or, if they had, whether the...appearance of RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE in shackles would engender any bias against him.” Rhodes v. State, 264 Ga, 123, 441 S.E.2d 748 (1994). WHEREFORE, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE respectfully requests that: (@) the Court conduet an evidentiary hearing on this motion; (b) this Court issue an order directing that at all public appearances in thiscourtroom and at all occasions when RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE js brought into court, he be allowed to dress in appropriate civilian clothing and that he not bbe shackled and/or chained while in the well of this or any other courtroom; (©) that the Court conduct a timely voir dite of any jurors or prospective jurors who may have viewed RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE in jail garb, shackles, or chains to ascertain any potential prejudice; and () tht RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE have such other relief as is proper in this imattr, DATED this day of jet Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No. 514917 Michael W: Gowen Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, ‘i TL A Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit ‘Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500 Prepared by: H, Burton Baker, Ga, Bar No. 033500 Attomey for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKEMotion No,__ IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY ‘STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, Plaintitt, INDICTMENT NO. 2017CR027 v. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE , Defendant, MOTION FOR AN ORDER PROHIBITING RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE FROM BEING EXHIBITED IN JAIL CLOTHING CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that @ copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attomey for IRWIN County via ___ First-class United States mail vie the Postal Service; ot — Hand delivery to the District Attorney's Office; or Personal service upon the District Attorney in Court; ae DATED this_ day of hes, Py 2018, Ah 'H. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counset for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar No.033500IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY ‘STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, Plaintiff, v INDICTMENT NO. 2017CRO27 RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, Defendant, ORDER Upon consideration of RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE’s Motion for an Order Prohibiting RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE from Being Exhibited in Jail Clothing, the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, and good grounds appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED AND DECREED that the defendant will not be exhibited in, clothing during any hearings or during the trial, SO ORDERED the ___ day of. 420__ Judge Hon. Bill Reinhart IRWIN County Superior Court Prepered by: H, Burton Baker, Ga. Bar No, 033500 Attomey for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE,worions If IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TIFT COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA. a STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017CR027 ) v ) ) RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE , ) ) Defendant. ) ) MOTION TO PRECLUDE PUBLIC SHACKLING RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves that the Court enter an order dictating that the defendant not be shackled in public, This motion is predicated upon RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE’s rights under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Bighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 1, 1, 2, 4, 5, 79% 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 24, & 28 of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, intemational treaties and customary law, and other authority cited herein. In support of this motion, counsel states: 1, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE is on trial for Murder 2. In Deck Missouri, 125 8. Ct. 2007 (2005), the United States Supreme Court surveyed legal precedent stretching back to the 18" century on the issue of shackling of eriminal defendants at trial, and concluded that “the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit the use of physical restraints visible to the jury absent a trial court determination, in the exercise of its discretion, that they are justified by a state interest specific to a particular trial.” Deck v. Filed in Offi day of AM, Ths,defendants whose lawyers have failed to preserve their rights, It is clear, at this point in the development of the law, that procedural rules must be a two-way street: “What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.” Aleerte v. McGinnis, 898 F.2d 69, 72 (7 Cir. 1990). “[T]he Due Process Clause . . . forbids enforcement of . . . rules unless reciprocal rights are given to criminal defendants.” Wardius v, Oregon, 412 U.S. 470, 472 (1973). For this reason, procedural rules have been applied with equal force against the prosecution as against the defense. Sec, ¢.8., Wilson v, O'Leary, 895 F.2d 378, 384 (7 Cir. 1990); Aloerte v. McGinnis, 898 F.2d at 71-72; Russell v, Rolfs, 893 F.2d 1033, 1038 (9 Cir. 1990); F json, $94 F.2d 353, 355 (0 Cir. 1990); Cole v. Young, 817 F.2d 412, 415 (7" Cir. 1987); Merlo v. Bolden, 801 F.2d 252, Boykins v, Wainwright, 737 F.2d 1539, 1545 (11 Cir, 1984); see also Hitchcock v. Dugger, 481 U.S. 393, 399 (1987) (waiver of harmless error by failing to raise it). 255 (6 Cir. 1986); Barrera v, Young, 794 F.2d 1264, 1267-68 (7 Cir. 198¢ 8. Therefore, unless the prosecution attorneys announce what their position is, and why, they will be defaulted from arguing varying positions on any appeal. This is only fair when the accused loses by default, he or she dies; when the prosecution loses by default, the State may still get to keep Ryan Alexander Dukes in prison under a life sentence without the possibility of parole, 9. Citation of Authority: Courts require parties to “support propositions of law with reasons and authorities.” Pate v. State, 419 So.2d 1324, 1325-26 (Miss. 1982). This not only ensures notice and faimess to the opposing party, but protects the Court from being misled into committing errors of law, especially reversible ones, The State must also provide authority in this case. Therefore, unless the prosecution cites authority in responses, this Court should rule that the prosecution waived their opportunity to argue to the Court that the motion should not be granted: {The} rules apply to the government as well as to defendants. [The State] has forfeited what would have been its best argument. If asthe court and respect its authority, as well as maintain public confidence in the judicial system and the legal profession. United States v. Alabama, 571 F.Supp. 958 (N.D. Ala, 1983); ‘American Bar Asso tion, Standards of Criminal Justice §3-1.2(b); Adams v, State, 198 So. 24 255 (Ala. 1967) (the primary duty of the office of the District Attomey is to see that justice is done). 14. The role of the public prosecutor has long been recognized as a special one: The responsibility of a public prosecutor differs from that of the usual advocate; his duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict. This special duty exists because: (1) the prosecutor represents the sovereign and therefore should use restraint in the discretionary exercise of governmental powers, such as in the selection of cases to prosecute, (2) during the trial, the prosecutor is not only an advocate but he also may make decisions normally made by an individual client, and those affecting the public interest should be fair to all; and (3) in our system of criminal justice the accused is to be given the benefits of all reasonable doubts. Georsia Code of Professional Responsibility, EC 7-13; see also, Bums v. State, 172 Ga.App. 645, 324 S.E.2d 197 (1984); American Bar Association, Standards, 3-1.2(c) (prosecutor has responsibility to guard the rights of the accused as well as those of society at large); American Ber Associat mm, Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 3.8 comment [1]; O.C.G.A. § 15-18-2 (oath requiring district attomey to discharge duties faithfully and impartially). 15. The District Attomey and his or her assistants have an obligation to respond to cach defense motion if the State intends to oppose the relief requested therein, To wait until the motions hearings and then orally respond fails to satisfy the obligations placed upon the prosecutor to actively address Ryan Alexander Dukes's appeals for relief from violations of his constitutional rights. If the State has a legitimate interest in objecting to a particular motion, then the prosecutor should set forth his opposition to those requests in such a timely manner that the defense may be prepared to respond to the State’s argument and cited authority.IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA. See, STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017CR027 ) “ ) ) RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, ) ) Defendant ) ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE L hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attomey for Inwin County via ___ First-class United States mail via the Postal Service; or and delivery to the District Attomey's Office; or rersonal service upon the District Attomey in Court; DATED this f thn 2018, H A fon Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500 Filed in Offi + Hold teak asa Gat i CaryMotion! IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA } \ STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO, 3017-CR-027 Plaintit, ) ) v ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant. ) J MOTION TO PREVENT PREJUDICIAL SECURITY MEASURES RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to prevent prejudicial security measures. This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourtcenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 1, 111, 4M, IV, V, Vil. IX, X, XL, XH, XIL, XIV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XXIV and XXVILof the Constitution of the State of Georgia, intemational treaties and customary intemational law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: 1. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE is on tial for Malice Murder. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE faces the potential imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole, 2, Its anticipated that at the trial of RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE there will be at least four or five uniformed deputy sheriffs in the Courtroom. The law enforcement presence is Fijed in Offg0 at, WoeS.Ct. 1340, 89 L.Ed.2d 525 (1986). ‘The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Cireuit found that threat was realized and set aside the conviction and death sentence in Woods v. Dugger, 923 F.2d 1454, 1460-1461 (11th Cir. 1991). ‘That Court also set aside a death sentence because of prejudicial courtroom security in Elledge v, Dugger, 823 F.2d 1439, 1450-1452 (11th Cir. 1987). 5. Prejudicial security measures would deprive RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE of the independent state and federal constitutional guarantees to: a fair trial and right to present 2 defense, cross-cxamination and confrontation of adverse witnesses and evidence, the effective assistance of counsel, freedom from compulsory self-incrimination, due process of law,, to equal protection of the laws, to freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, and a reliable verdict and sentence. Ga, Const. art. I, § 1, WI. Il, 1V, V, VII, IX, X, XT, Xl, XII, XIV, XVI, XVI, XVI, XXIV and XXVIII; U.S. Const, amend, V, VI, VIII and XIV. WHEREFORE, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE requests: 1. that this Court conduct a hearing at which counsel will be apprised of the security measures proposed for the trial of this case, and 2. that the Court thereafter enter an appropriate order prohibiting the Sheriff of this county from employing any security measures which will prejudice the defendant’s right to a fair, reliable and objective determination of guilt or innocence and sentence, and 3. that counsel for defendant have leave of the court to photograph the presence of courtroom security for possible appellate purposes. 4. that the Court order such other relief as is necessary to protect the defendant's rights.Motion__ IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY | STATE OF GEORGIA. ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) ) ve ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) Defendant. } ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attorney for CHATHAM County via _/fesitsa Und Stee mal vats Postal Servion oe “7 Hand delivery to the District Attamey’s Office; or _ Personal service upon the District Attorney in Court; DATED this ¥ ee Aegecl +2017. E Sa. Bar No. 033500 ‘Trial Attomey Office of the Georgia Capital Defender P.O. Box 1909 Tifton Georgia 229-386-3642 fax 229-386-3642 bbaker@gpdse.com Counsel for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE,orion £3 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, Ryan Alexander Duke, Defendant, MOTION FOR AN IN CAMERA INSPECTION OF FILES OF ALL POLICE WITNESSES RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an in camera inspection of the personnel files of all law enforcement witnesses, whom the State intends to call at trial, for evidence of perjurous conduct or other similar dishonesty, to determine if those portions of the officers’ files should be made available to defense counsel for impeachment purposes. This motion is predicated upon the Fifth, Sixth, Fighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, § 1, $11, Il, 1V, V, VI, IX, X, XI, XI, XIN, XIV, XVI, XVIL, XVIII, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, intemational treaties and customary international law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: 1. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE is on trial for his life. ‘The State has announced its intention to seck the imposition of a possible sentence of life imprisonment without parole, “RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE seeks any and all records and information contained within the Fijed in Offi os_ tool 1 t 8 AM. BD DS Tow. Cin Sf Can CoanDATED the 9 day « Apa. 2018, 35 5 Chief Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No. $14917 Michael W"Gowen Assistant Public Defender ‘Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ad 5 i 2 gz Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Cireuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500MOTION _ IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MONROE COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 15-CR.34 Plaintiff, ) ) ve ) ) AMANDA ANN HENDRICKSON, ) ) Defendant. ) J ORDER Upon consideration of RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE’s Motion for an in Camera Inspection of Files of All Police Winesses, the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, and ‘good grounds appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED, that this Court will conduct an in camera inspection of these files specifically for the information requested by Defendant's motion and, in the event the information exists, to disclose it (o the Defendant pursuant to Brady v, Maryland, SO ORDERED the day of | 20_, Judge Hon. Bill Reinhart TIFT County Superior Court Prepared by: H. Burton Baker, Ga. Bar No. 033500 Attomey for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKEwononlf IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY, STATE OF GEORGIA. STATE OF GEORGIA, ; ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) ) v ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant ) ) MOTION TO CONDUCT CLOSED EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE'S MOTION FOR ‘CLOSURE OF PRETRIAL PROCEEDINGS RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to close the evidentiary hearing to be held with regard to his motion to have this Court conduct in-camera hearings with regard to several of his pretrial motions. This motion is made pursuant (0 the provisions of the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, to Article 1, § 1 91, Il, Xi, XI, XIV, and XVII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, to Southeastem Newspapers Corp. v. Siale, 265 Ga, 223, 454 8.6.24 452 (1995), and to all other applicable law. In support of this Motion, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE shows as follows: 1. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE is on trial for Malice Murder. 2. Courts have recognized the need to hold closed hearings on motions for closure of pretrial proceedings. In [ix parte The Birmingham News Co., Ine,, 624 So. 2d 1117 (Ala. Crim ‘App. 1993), members of the press filed a petition for a writ of mandamus with the Alabama Supreme Court seeking to compel a trial court to release transcripts of closed pretrial proceedings. In ils disposition of the matter, the Alabama Supreme Court reaffirmed the trial a Fijed in OMe totRYAN ALEXANDER DUKE will argue the need for closure in order to keep sensitive information, including inadmissible statements and illegally obtained and unreliable evidence, from being admitted at trial, The highly prejudicial effects of public disclosure of such sensitive information compels this Court to hear RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE’s motion in a closed session of the court, WHEREFORE, RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE requests that this Court enter orders: (1) excluding the public, print and electronic media from the evidentiary hearing regarding the closure of pretrial proceedings; (2) directing that the records and transcripts of such hearing be sealed until a jury is impaneled and sequestered; and 3) granting such other relief as is appropriate, te pateo tte Yasser bsg 2018 Respectfully Submitted, John R. Mobley It Chief Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No. 514917 Michael W. Gowen Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. DukeIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA oo _ ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) ) ¥. ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant ) ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attorney for IRWIN County via fst-class United States mail via the Postal Service; or ind delivery to the District Attorney's Office; or © Personal service upon the District Attomey in Court; Ww nares, 4 sia ctell _12018. Hi. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit ‘Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar No.033500motion |S IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY ‘STATE OF GEORGIA _— a) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) ) 7 ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant. ) ) MOTION FOR AN ORDER APPOINTING AN IMPARTIAL WITNESS MONITOR Ryan Alexander Duke, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to appoint an impartial witness monitor. This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, § 1, $41, , IV, Vv, VU, IX, X, XI, XI, XI, XIV, XVI, XVI, XVIII, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of | the State of Georgia, international treaties and customary international law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. {In support, counsel states: 1, Ryan Alexander Duke is on trial for Malice Murder. 2. Ryan Alexander Duke has moved this Court for an order sequestering all State's witnesses at each and every stage of the proceedings against him, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 24-9- 61. ‘The "rule of sequestration” has been held to apply to all communications between witnesses,and neutral person or persons to serve as a monitor of the conduct of the potential witnesses while they are grouped together at the Courthouse awaiting their call to testify. DATED the 7 day of _ 2018. ‘Bley T (ef Public Defender Tifton Judicial Circuit Counse! for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar Nog514917 Michael W. Gowen Assistant Public Defender Tifton Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, "i , 3 ap ‘A. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tifton Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar No.033500IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, } ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant. ) oo ) ORDER Upon consideration of Ryan Alexander Duke's Motion for an Order Appointing an Impartial Witness Monitor, the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, and good grounds appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED, that an independent and neutral person or persons shall be appointed to serve as a monitor of the conduct of the potential witnesses while they are grouped together at the Courthouse awaiting their call to testify, and subsequent to their testimony while they remain in the Courthouse. SO ORDERED the day OF es Judge Hon. Bill Reinhart Irwin County Superior Court Prepared by H, Burton Baker, Gu. Bar No, 033500 Attory fot RYAN ALEXANDER DUKEorion /6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, Ryan Alexander Duke, Defendant, MOTION TO DISQUALIFY ALL POTENTIAL JURORS WHO KNEW OR WERE ACQUAINTED WITH THE VICTIMS OR THEIR FAMILIES Ryan Alexander Duke, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to disqualify all potential jurors who knew or were acquainted with the victims or their families. ‘This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, §1, $1 Hl, IV, V, VIL, IX, X, XI, XI, XII, XIV, XVI, XVII, XVII, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, intemational treaties and customary international law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: 1. Ryan Alexander Duke is on trial for Malice Murder. Ryan Alexander Duke faces the potential imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole, Consistent with these genetal principles governing cases in Capital cases it is imperative that the Court take every reasonable step to reduce the risk of improper and prejudicial influences upon the trial jury. Asa ‘matter of federal and Georgia law, it is well established that individuals who have been exposed to highly prejudicial information regarding a capital defendant must be presumed biased for Fijed in Offige aotpenalty could be imposed, itis imperative that the Court take every reasonable step to reduce the risk of improper and prejudicial influences upon the trial jury. As a matter of federal and Georgia law, itis well established that individuals who have been exposed to highly prejudicial information regarding a capital defendant must be presumed biased for purposes of sitting on his, capital sentencing jury and thus should be excused from jury service. Lively v. State, 262 Ga. 510, 421 S.E.2d 528 (1992). See also Tyree v, State, 262 Ga, 395, 418 S.B.2d 16, 18 (1992); Jones v. State, 261 Ga, 665, 409 S.E.2d 642, 643, n.5 (1991); Colem: v.Kemp, 778 F.2d 1487, 1542 (1th Cir. 1985) 3. As early as Blackstone's Commentaries, our forefathers had relinquished the practice of purposefully selecting jurors who knew beforehand the character and credibility of the parties and witnesses, 3 W. Blackstone, Commentaries at 359. This practice was abandoned because “jurors, coming out of the immediate neighbourhood, would be apt to intermix their prejudices and partialities in the tiral of right.” Id. at 359-360. Thus, for centuries now, juries have been selected “only. . de corpore comitatus, from the body of the county at large, and not de veineto, or from the particular neighborhood.” Id. at 360. This long tradition reflects values that are fundamental to our criminal justice system: the right to @ fair trial and to impartial and uninterested jurors. “The right to jury trial guarantees . . . a fair trial by a panel of impartial, ‘indifferent’ jurors.” A failure to afford a criminal defendant this right “violates even the minimal standards of due process.” Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719, 112 S.Ct, 2222, 2228, 119 L.E4.2d 492 (1992) (quoting Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717, 722, 81 S.Ct. 1639, 6 L.Ed.24 751 (1961)). “Jurors should come to a case free from even a suspicion of prejudgment of the issues to be tried - as to the parties, the subject matter, or the credibility of witnesses.” Parisic v. State,doubt that the court “‘crosse{s] the line of neutrality’ and produce[s] a jury uncommonly willing, to condemn « man to die.” Locka /. MoCrev, 476 U.S. at 179 (quoting Witherspoon, 391 U.S. at $20-521), For these reasons, potential jurors who are related to or acquainted with the victim - whether closely or distantly - must be removed from a capital jury if the defendant challenges them, Clearly, “victim jurors” must also be removed from the venire at 's capital trial due to their implied bias. The failure to remove any such jurors would result in reversible error since ) Defendant, ) aeaet MOTION TO PROTECT JURY FROM EXPOSURE TO VICTIM'S FAMILY OR FRIENDS Ryan Alexander Duke, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to issue an order to shield the jury from exposure to the victim's family or friends. This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 1, $9, I, 1V, V, VI, IX, X, X1, XU, XML, XIV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, international treaties and customary intemational law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: 1. Ryan Alexander Duke is on trial for Malice Murder. Ryan Alexander Duke faces sentence that includes the possibility of the imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. 2 ‘The Court should proactively issue an order to insure that there is no opportunity for communications between the jury and anyone other than the Court or to the bailiffs assigned to supervise and assist them, 3, In the case of Fuselier v, State, 418 So.24. 45, 57 (Miss. 1987) the Mississippi Fijed in Offige tie to sod Deeg tia —Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar No,,5}4917 Michael W. Gowen Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Mile i. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar No.033500IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY, STATE OF GEORGIA ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant, ) ) ORDER Upon consideration of Ryan Alexander Duke’s Motion fo Protect Jury from Exposure to Victim's Family or Friends, the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, and good grounds appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED: (1) that the jury not be dispersed at any time; (2) that the jury not to communicate with anyone except the court or bailiffs; (3) that any such communications shall be reported directly to the Court and to the attorneys for Ryan Alexander Duke; and (4) that the jury not be taken out of the courtroom at a time when they might be exposed to the victim's family, friends, or other witnesses. SO ORDERED the day of 120. Judge Hon. Bill Reinhart Irwin County Superior Court Prepared by: H, Burton Baker, Ga. Bar No, 033500 ‘Atomey for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKEorion 12 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant. ) ) MOTION TO LIMIT CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN JURORS AND BAILIFFS Ryan Alexander Duke, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to prohibit extraneous conversations between jurors and bailiffs. This motion is predicated upon. the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 1 41, HL, IV, V, VIL, IX, X, XI, XU, XU, XIV, XVI, XVIL, XVI, XXIV and XXVIIL of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, international treaties and customary international law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: I. Ryan Alexander Duke is on trial for Malice Murder. Ryan Alexander Duke faces potential imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. O.C.G.A. § 15-12-140 requires that a special oath be given to each person who assumes the duties ofa bailiff in the superior court. That oath is as follows You shall take all juries committed to your charge during the present term to the jury room or some other private and convenient place where you shali keep them without meat or drink (water excepted), uniess otherwise directed by the court. You shall make Filed in Offi tsb aay pe 2olk Tim 28? _ AM, sw Cony5. In order to avert any possibility of improper communication between the jury and the bailiffS and the consequent mistrial of this case, the Court should issue a prophylactic order limiting conversations between jurors and bailiffs to logistical matters, and prohibiting jurors and bailiffs from discussing any matters other than those relating to “keepfing]” the jury, and the provision of “meat and drink.” WHEREFORE, Ryan Alexander Duke respectfully requests that this Court enter an order limiting conversations between jurors and bailiffs to logistical matters, and probibiting jurors and bailiffs from discussing any matters other than those relating to “keep[ing]” the jury, and the provision of “meat and drink,” see O.C,G.A. § 15-12-140, and directing that there be no other DATED the q caver Aug 2018. Respectfully Submitted, fobley It Chief Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar No. 914917 MEY De Michael W. Gowen Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Abe Le ef H. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit discovered, after the trial of the case, that a bailiff had made remarks to a juror which intimated that the bailiff knew that the defendant was guilty. The juror did not report the conversation until after the trialIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA ey STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) d ¥. d d Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ORDER Upon consideration of Ryan Alexander Duke's Motion to Limit Conversations Between Jurors and Bailiffs, the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, and good grounds appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED, that there be no communications between the bailiffs and the jurors except upon express direction of the Court, with the exception of logistical matters relating to transportation, lodging and food service. SOORDERED the __day of _ Judge Hon. Bill Reinhart Irwin County Superior Court Prepared by: Hi. Bution Baker, Ga. Bar No. 033500 “Anormey for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKEte MoTIONZO IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintitt, v Ryan Alexander Duke, Defendant, MOTION FOR AN ORDER ALLOWING Ryan Alexander Duke TO EXERCISE HIS CHALLENGES FOR CAUSE OUTSIDE ‘THE PRESENCE OF THE PANEL MEMBERS Ryan Alexander Duke, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an order allowing him to exercise his cause challenges outside the presence of the panel members. ‘This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 1, 441, ll, 1V, V, VII, IX, X, XI, XI, XII, XIV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XXIV and XVII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, international treaties and customary intemational law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: I. Ryan Alexander Duke is for Malice Murder. The defendant has a possible imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole 2. Under current Georgia practice, challenges for cause are divided into challenges for principal cause and challenges for favor. See Jordan v. State, 247 Ga. 328, 338, 276 S.E.2d. 224 (1981); Hayans v. State, 77 Ga. App. 513, 48 S.E.2d 700 (1948), A challenge for principal ‘cause is based on grounds which would automatically disqualify the juror as matter of law; aIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) d Plaintiff, 7 INDICTMENT NO. 2017CR027 > v. ) » RYAN ALEXANDER OUKE, ) ) Defendant. ) eee) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been delivered to The Office of the District Attorney for Irwin County via Fisting Unie States ail vi the Postal Service or Hand delivery to the District Attorney's Office; or — Personal service upon the District Attomey in Court; fe DATED this J day of Cfo Assistant Public Defender TiN Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500moron Z/ IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, v, Ryan Alexander Duke, Defendant. MOTION FOR AN ORDER ALLOWING THE DEFENDANT TO EXAMINE ALL JURORS PRIOR TO EXERCISING PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES Ryan Alexander Duke, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an order allowing the defendant to examine all jurors prior to exercising peremptory challenges. This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article f, § 1, $1, Il, 1V, V, VII, IX, X, XI, XH, XIN, XIV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XXIV and XXVII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, intemational treaties and customary international law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: 1, Ryan Alexander Duke is on trial for Malice Murder. ‘The State has announced its intention to seek to possible imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. O.C.G.A. § 15-12-133 was enacted in order to permit the parties to any a trial to examine the individual jurors making up the juror panels before interposing their challenges. See Keebler v, wi lard, 90 Ga.App. 66, 81 S.E.2d 842 (1954). This code section provides as follows: In all criminal cases both the state and the defendant shall have the right to an individual examination of each juror from which Fijed in Offigeany challenges. DATED th D wor hig 2018, Respectfully Submitted, jobley 11 Chief Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga. Bar No. ee Michael W. Gowen Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit ‘Counsel for Mr. Duke H. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tif Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, v. Ryan Alexander Duke, Defends el Upon consideration of Ryan Alexander Duke's Motion For an Order Allowing The Defendant to Examine All Jurors Prior to Exercising Peremptory Challenges, the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, and good grounds appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED, that all jurors will be individually questioned in accordance with the applicable law prior to the exercise of any challenges. SO ORDERED the___ day of Judge Hon. Bill Reinhart Irwin County Superior Court Prepared by , Bunion Baker, Ga. Bar No, 033500 Aitomey for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKEmotion22- IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY, ‘STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, v. Ryan Alexander Duke, Defendant. MOTION FOR AN ORDER ALLOWING Ryan Alexander Duke TO EXERCISE HIS PEREMPTORY STRIKES OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE PANEL MEMBERS, Ryan Alexander Duke, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to allow Ryan Alexander Duke to exercise his peremptory strikes outside the presence of the pene! members. This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 1, $11, Il, (V, V, VII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIIL, XIV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XXIV and XXVUI of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, international treaties and customary international law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: 1. Ryan Alexander Duke is on trial for his life. Mr. Dukes faces the potential imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. Ryan Alexander Duke has requested, through written motion, individual sequestered voir dire of prospective jury members. Ryan Alexander Duke has separately moved for an order permitting challenges for cause to beChief Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit ‘Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No. 514917 Michael W. Gowen Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Cireuit Counsel for Mr. Duke H. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500MOTIONaS IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA ) STATE OF GEORGIA, ) ) INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Ryan Alexander Duke, ) ) Defendant. ) ) MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR CLOSING ARGUMENT Ryan Alexander Duke, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court to extend time for closing argument. This motion is predicated upon the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article 1, §1, $911, I IV, V, VI, 1X, X, XI, XIl, XIII, XIV, XVI, XVIL, XVIII, XXIV and XXVIII of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, intemational treaties and customary intemational law, as well as statutory and jurisprudential authorities cited below. In support, counsel states: Ryan Alexander Duke is on trial for Malice Murder. Ryan Alexander Duke faces a potential imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. 2, This case involves allegations of Murder, Aggravated Assault, , Burglary and Concealing th Death of Another. 3. This case is, upon information and belief, the largest case file in the history of the Georgia Bureau of investigation. The case also involves testimony from numerous witnesses for the State and the defense. There appear to be allegations of malfeasance and misfeasance on theAd, 1. Burton Baker Assistant Public Defender ‘Tift Judicial Circuit Counsel for Mr. Duke Ga, Bar No.033500IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF IRWIN COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA STATE OF GEORGIA, INDICTMENT NO. 2017-CR-027 Plaintiff, Ryan Alexander Duke, Defendant. ORDER Upon consideration of Ryan Alexander Duke's Motion to Extend Time for Closing Argument, the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, and good grounds appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED, that Ryan Alexander Duke shall have an additional two hours in which to present closing argument in this case. SOORDERED the day of _ Judge Hon, Bili Reinhart Irwin County Superior Court Prepared by: H, Burton Baker, Ga. Bar No. 033500 “Attorney for RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE,