Jackson Jambalaya

"Weill also refused to allow Assistant Public Defender Alison Kelly, who he said he didn't want handling cases anymore in his court."

Refused Alison Kelly to do what? More great writing by Jimmie Gates.

Weill needs to get over himself. He's a judge, not a king.

9:10-you seemed to have confused Jimmie Gates with a true journalist. Your bad. At best, he's a wanna be-'portant 9th grade journalism student (and I'm probably giving him more credit than he deserves). His routine failed attempt at investigative journalism is embarrassing to the field, the Clarion Liar, and to our state. Sad sad sad.

9:27 --

I don’t pretend to know what, but there is a lot more at play here, I assure you.

Weill is by far the most measured and judicious of the 4 Hinds County circuit judges.

You want a monarch? Tomie Greene’s in the big courtroom.

"Weill is by far the most measured and judicious of the 4 Hinds County circuit judges."

That's not saying much. And even if it were true, what he is doing is just wrong, wrong, wrong.

Citing cases to the court that have been overturned

Inappropriately talking to witnesses during trial

Illegally running a private practice while being a full time HC PD

Illegally living outside of Hinds County while working as HC PD

Disrupting courtroom

(all allegedly of course)

Don't know many judges that would put up with that. Weill has just had enough of dealing with people who don't think the rules apply to them

There's this thing called due process.

I don't know anything about the specifics but I'd be willing to side with Weill based purely on my knowledge of Hinds County Corruption.

9:59 - Judge? You don't have the authority to prohibit someone from practicing before you. Attorney discipline is the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, not trial judges. Issues regarding violations of Hinds County policy are to be decided by the Board of Supervisors.

to 10:23

Nothing contained in these rules shall be construed to deny to any other court such powers as may be necessary for that court to maintain control over practice and proceedings conducted before it

10:23 A judge can't sanction an attorney or hold them in contempt??? Interesting.

Most attorneys that have ever dealt with Weill will tell you, as an earlier post stated, that the man believes himself to be a king. Yes, he gives out "tough" sentences and that allows for the general public to believe he is a good judge.

What they do not know is that Judge Weill treats lawyers, court staff, baliffs, etc. as being lower than whale crap. He is a disgrace to the bench.

I agree that the rules apply to everyone, including judges. There are appropriate ways to handle Weill's purported beefs with the PD's office. He hasn't come close to any of them.

10:37 and 10:40 - I'm not talking sanctions and contempt. That's courtroom management Prohibiting someone from practicing is a different form of discipline reserved for the higher court.

@10:46.....Did you know??? Weill is an ELECTED OFFICIAL ! ! ! He can DO NO WRONG ! HE KNOWS EVEYTHING!! HE IS A KING ! ! !

He's also an attorney and most all attorney are pompous windbags that truly enjoy hearing themselves talk.

Notice I didnt say ALL attorneys...I said MOST ALL attorneys....

@10:40. It looks like 10:23 was responding to 9:59's comments about Ms Kelly's behavior. As far as we know, she hasn't been sanctioned or held in contempt, only banned from that courtroom. I assume that's what the commenter was referring to in talking about discipline.

From Article:
Hinds County Circuit Judge Jeff Weill today held Public Defender Michele Harris and Assistant Public Defender Greg Spore in contempt of court in a dispute with the Public Defenders Office.

My commentary:
He also had her removed because she openly refused his order to "stand down". When a judge tells you to sit down or stand down or shut up in his/her courtroom, you have to do it. That's just the way the system works. Doesn't matter if the peanut gallery thinks he/she is a meanie or not. Heck, watch Judge Judy.

1:14 - we're discussing his barring of Alison Kelly from his courtroom, not whether yesterday's contempt citations were correct.

I have practiced in Judge Weill's courtroom and have personally witnessed unethical behavior on the part of Ms. Kelly. I have also witnessed Judge Weill display the patience of Job when dealing with Ms. Kelly when I KNOW other judges would have had her locked up. Kelly has continued to disrespect the Court. I'm not saying he followed the proper protocols but I do understand.

I am amazed by the number of people posting here and on the CL website who are criticizing Weill without any knowledge of whether the actual facts support his decision or not. I can assure you that the judge has the power to remove someone from his courtroom that won't abide by the rules of the court (people seem to disagree with that, too). Does anyone actually know that her actions didn't rise to the level that would make Weill's decision justified? Did you guys read Weill's letter to the head PD? He very respectfully said that Kelly wasn't following the rules. Maybe people don't like Weill or maybe they just don't like the idea of someone being in charge.

@ March 17, 2015 at 2:09 PM

Kelley does act out in Weill's courtroom. But Weill's actions are way out there on this.

What Judge Weill should have done was recuse and transfer the cases and let Judge Green enjoy the pleasure of Ms. Kelley's company for a while.

2:09, if you've seen unethical behavior, don't you have a duty to report said misconduct?

Weill is a good Judge.

From fn. 3 on p. 6 of the Motion linked above:

It should be noted that the Court has taken no remedial action against APD Kelly for these alleged violations during the four-year term of Judge Weill with one exception: during the cases of State v. David Thomas and State v. Tony Alexander, the case made a finding on the record that APD Kelly had willfully refused to file jury instructions in both cases and found APD Kelly in criminal contempt for such refusal. Subsequent to that finding, the record revealed that APD Kelly never refused to do anything the Court had asked in either case and the Court ultimately set aside the orders of contempt.

"It should be noted that the Court has taken no remedial action against APD Kelly for these alleged violations during the four-year term of Judge Weill with one exception"

As set forth in some length at TBA, this is a large part of my problem here. If there's misconduct, you issue a show-cause order, you give the att'y a chance to argue why sanctions aren't proper, you impose the sanctions, the att'y can appeal.

Sitting on your hands forever and then popping up with "you are banned from my courtroom, end of discussion" does not seem to me the proper way of doing things.

4:22 is correct. Issue Show Cause Order and schedule and conduct show cause hearing before issuing contempt citation and penalties.

I have experience as a litigator with Judge Weill. I do not care for him as a judge. He is truly not an impartial magistrate.

That said, all non attorneys need to understand that there are two versions of contempt of court. Direct contempt occurs when misconduct is done in the presence of the Judge in open court. Contempt is a summary procedure with punishment inflicted without a hearing. When misconduct is reported to the Judge that is alleged to have taken place out of court, example improperly talking to a juror, a hearing is required before a new judge, not the presiding judge.

As I understand it, both Spore and Harris were ordered to "stand down" and refused. I was told that Harris told Judge Weill to "do what you have to do, I won't obey". Judge Weill had no real options but to hold them both in contempt, because they were in contumacious contempt at that point. Very unprofessional.

I return to my view that Weill is not a good judge. That is irrelevant, as is the issues of removing the PD and substitution of private counsel. ALL attorneys must respect the OFFICE of the Judge, not necessarily the person temporarily occupying that seat. You argue BEFORE Judges, not with them!

sorry @9:27AM Jerge jeff is sick of misbehaving retards posing as "public defenders" turning his court room into routine shit storms because they are to stupid to behave otherwise. Jerge Jeff's only crime is that he is white and holds those bottom feeders accountable! sooooooooo, why don't you sit down and STFU?

6:03, that is a great point. If Weill is wrong re: Kelly, that doesn't make Purvis (Harris?) necessarily right.

There's a temptation to set up good guys vs. bad guys, & life is usually more complicated.

That said, Weill makes things worse by not holding a hearing. There's no forum for Harris to rebut Weill (the MSSC is ignoring the affair), and so it's predictable she will try to speak out at the wrong time. When is the right time? When is that?

And so it REALLY begins...

Anderson: Harris and Spore were wrong. Weill is a jackass of epic proportions. The remedy is not to engage in unprofessional conduct before said jackass. Said jackass currently wears a robe and has the temporary title of Judge. Due process has many directions.

It is beyond belief that there are any attorneys who would support the disgraceful antics of Michele Purvis-Harris and her staff to make a circus out of the criminal justice system. She is the head of a county-funded office but unilaterally selected by Judge Green, and she took her entire office to storm a courtroom with a concerted plan to intentionally defy a judge. Judge Green also just increased Ms. Harris’s salary. Her top-notch leadership now costs Hinds County taxpayers $122,874.00 a year (plus benefits).
The average joe may get lost in the complexities of the issue, but any semi-intelligent attorney should at least read the dozens of detailed opinions written by Judge Weill which are on appeal at the Supreme Court before playing armchair judge. A thorough reading of Weill's analysis shows that this was a carefully considered decision and that Alison Kelly brings shame to the profession. Further, the opinions make clear that Judge Weill is more concerned with the rights of poor defendants to competent representation than he is about some ill-informed media attention. This is beyond ironic, given the many attempts by the public defenders to make a baseless issue of race and this flies in the face of the irresponsible claims that Weill is unfair. Anyone who sees Alison Kelly in Judge Weill's courtroom walks away in disgust with her lack of respect for the rules and for the court. As many have noted, no other judge would have put up with a fraction of this nonsense. Most of all, the opinions show that Judge Weill is compassionate. He could have chosen to air all of the dirty details of Ms. Kelly's malfeasances. Instead, he showed he is above fighting this battle in a public forum.
Also, to the legal bloggers who seem to be obsessed with this issue and claim to know all about Weill’s demeanor in court and all about due process, maybe you should note pg. 60-61 of the petition linked below, which indicates that Weill sought and received procedural guidance before taking action.
http://courts.ms.gov/Images/Orders/400_151682.pdf

The incessant updates by Jane and Anderson are chock full of rhetoric- since you both say you are attorneys and you both keep posting about Judge Weill’s courtroom tendencies, please tell us how many trials you have had in front of him.

9:56, please quote my comment about "Judge Weill's courtroom tendencies." Take your time. I'll wait.

As for the curse of reading "incessant updates," if you are fool enough to read my blog -- well, who's to blame for that?

Hey Judge Weill.......um I mean 9:54

9:54 - can I call you "Jeff"? - Green "unilaterally selected" Harris because that's what the statute says: chief judge picks the PD.

On second thought, the real Weill wouldn't be so disingenuous about that.

As for "too noble to sanction," well okay. I'm reminded of some TAs when I taught English in grad school. They would start off nice & friendly with the students ... lose control of the classroom ... and by the point in the semester that they tried to take control, the students already had them figured out. So the TA would get draconian ... with little success.

If the good judge knew how to manage his courtroom, would things have gone this far?

My gawd ya'll! Where is Swan when we need him? I remember well when that dumb ass Thommie Green was elevated to "senior" jerge when Swan retired and the dire predictions that the court system would become a shit storm and, well, um, you learned blow hards are fulfilling the dream!

I agree Anderson,

There is another process that Weill ignored. If at any time he believed Kelly to be violating any rule or done anything unethical, he, as an attorney, has a duty to report her conduct to the bar and not take it upon himself to wait and let this build up. You can't sit on your hands and then a year later decide you want to take action. I can only believe that he didn't report her to the bar b/c he didn't really have a problem with her acting out or he know the bar would not find anything. If her alleged behavior was as bad as he claims he should have taken action much sooner.

@9:54
"Weill sought and received procedural guidance before taking action."

And obviously there's no way that "guidance" was ill advised or just flat out wrong. I mean, obviously.

11:01 - but he acted "after extensive consultation with the applicable administrative authorities"! How could the applicable administrative authorities be wrong?

Weill is a paranoid over-bearing self-imposed King. It is because the PD's office zealously represents their clients that he wants them removed. He wants attorneys who will just allow their clients to go to jail without due process. As far as telling an attorney to stand down, he needs to allow the attorney to make a record of their argument, and then he can rule and move on. Also, if a judge stops an attorney from practicing in his courtroom, that is almost the same as disbarring that attorney from practicing law, which is only within the purview of the Supremes.

I've been practicing law for 20+ years and a universally understood protocol is that whether you disagree with a judge or not, when you are asked to "stand down", you do so NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR REBUTTAL, you just close your mouth - that simple. I don't spend much time in Hinds county, but it would seem to me that regardless of Judge Greene's and Judge Weill's political or ideological differences, Judge Green needs to at least reprimand or even suspend her appointee Ms. Harris for turning one of Judge Green's courtrooms into a circus - this is about the robe and court decorum, not about personalities. If you disagree with a Judge's ruling, you appeal and await the result - which Harris apparently already did.

12:44 - "Judge Green needs to at least reprimand or even suspend her appointee Ms. Harris for turning one of Judge Green's courtrooms into a circus"

(1) Green has that authority? Cite, please.

(2) Harris misbehaved. Weill sanctioned her. She's paid the sanction. Why is further discipline necessary? Because you think Weill didn't do enough and now Green has to run his courtroom for him?

Based on what I've heard thus far, it was probably proper for Weill to sanction Harris & the ass't PD. Doesn't make Weill right as to taking Kelly's cases away from her.

Bennie weighs in:
http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2015/03/18/bennie-thompson-jeff-weill-justice-department/24978931/

@ 11:01

So, the final arbiter of such issues provided ill-advised procedural guidance and/or were wrong, in your theoretical world?

And anderson.... are you really this damn stupid?

You state @ 6:59 that statute provides Judge Green the sole authority to appoint the HCPD, then ask @ 1:29 for one to cite the authority that Judge Green has that authority (suspend).

The problem with the legal field expanding at the rate that it has is that common turd of an attorney, is now a common turd of an attorney without any common sense.

Uncle Bennie is going to get embarrassed because he really had no real idea of the depth of this muck but had to pay back some favors. He will quickly wish he hadn't stepped in it and the just can't get the DOJ hooked on the racial/gender bias because one of the PD is a white male.

@10:07 pm

Anderson is correct. MCA 25-32-3(1) provides:

(1) When the office of public defender is established, the circuit judge or the senior circuit judge, if there be more than one (1) circuit judge, shall appoint a practicing attorney to serve the county or counties as public defender until the end of the term of office of the district attorney and thereafter for a term of four (4) years and said term shall coincide with the term of the district attorney. Such appointee shall be selected from a list of two (2) or more attorneys recommended by the county or regional bar association. In the event a vacancy shall occur in the office of the public defender, the circuit judge or the senior circuit judge, if there be more than one (1) circuit judge, shall appoint another person to serve as public defender until the end of the regular term of office.

Nowhere does the statute give the senior cicuit judge the authority to unilaterally suspendor reprimand the appointee.

Read the law before you go on a rant

Authority to appoint = authority to remove?

Cite, please.

In my experience, people with authority on their side don't have to call their opponents stupid turds. They just cite the authority & let the natural inference be drawn.

The fact is, there are some statutes here that haven't been interpreted yet by the MSSC. You can argue your view of them, but pretending it's all crystal clear makes you look ignorant or disingenuous.

Is it true that Judge Green has a close relative (son?, nephew?, or cousin?) that works for Congressman Thompson?

Anderson,

In my experience there are two types of individuals who use the phrase "in my experience." Those with actual experience in articulable, quantifiable situations and then those who use the phrase in vague, abstract situations as a form of digression.

Yours is the latter and you take bait like a bream in a pond full of bream.

You state statute allows Judge Green sole authority to appoint the HCPD. If Judge Green, by your stated statute, has sole authority to appoint the HCPD, then, by default, Judge Green has authority to suspend the HCPD. Unless you can "cite" where the statute states it's a tenured or lifetime appointment, her appointment of another HCPD would effectively suspend the current.

Common sense, the hammer with peen.

And the fact is, statutes do not have to be interpreted by the Supreme Court and the onus is on you. You are one of the ones complaining of Weil's actions, stating that statutes says ......., etc. So, provide statute that states Weil is in the wrong, and that Judge Green can't suspend. And statute does not have to implicitly provide authority.... in case you missed the common sense part of your dime store law degree.

@ 7:39

If nepotism was an actual crime, we wouldn't have hardly anyone in local government administration jobs.

@ 11:00pm

MCA 25-32-3(1) provides:

(1) When the office of public defender is established, the circuit judge or the senior circuit judge, if there be more than one (1) circuit judge, shall appoint a practicing attorney to serve the county or counties as public defender until the end of the term of office of the district attorney and thereafter for a term of four (4) years and said term shall coincide with the term of the district attorney. Such appointee shall be selected from a list of two (2) or more attorneys recommended by the county or regional bar association. In the event a vacancy shall occur in the office of the public defender, the circuit judge or the senior circuit judge, if there be more than one (1) circuit judge, shall appoint another person to serve as public defender until the end of the regular term of office.

Nowhere does the statute limit the senior cicuit [sic] judge from the authority to unilaterally suspendor [sic] reprimand the appointee.

Read the law before you go on a rant

March 19, 2015 at 8:56 AM = Typical egotist

It is necessary to consider the general rules of law governing appointment and removal in civil service......
......The power to remove is, in the absence of statutory provision to the contrary, an incident of the power to appoint. And the power of suspension is an incident of the power of removal.

Just in case the supposed legal experts commenting missed that.

As a public servant (defined in M.C.A. § 25-4-103 (p), Purvis would be protected from being arbitrarily removed from office by Miss. Const. Ann. Art. 6, § 175 (2013) which states that “All public officers, for wilful neglect of duty or misdemeanor in office, shall be liable to presentment or indictment by a grand jury; and, upon conviction, shall be removed from office, and otherwise punished as may be prescribed by law.” The Mississippi Supreme Court has consistently held that this provision means that where the statute authorizing the office also sets a specific term of office, that official may only be discharged for cause. Bd. of Mississippi Levee Com’rs v. Kellner, 189 Miss. 232, 196 So. 779 (1940); State ex rel Attorney General v. McDowell, 111 Miss. 596, 71 So. 867 (1916); Mississippi State Board of Health v. Mathews, 113 Miss. 510, 74 So. 417 (1917); Ware v. State ex rel. Poole, 111 Miss. 599, 71 So. 868 (1916). An exception exists but only where the statute states that the appointee serves at the will and pleasure of the appointing power. Bd. of Mississippi Levee Com’rs, 196 So. at 784. So, Purvis, too, could only be removed prior to the expiration of her four-year term for cause and after notice and a hearing. Barlow v. Weathersby, 597 So.2d 1288, 1293 (Miss. 1992).

9:19, (1) see 9:32; (2) quit digging.

The citation, btw, is to Burnap v. United States, 252 U.S. 512 (1920).

March 19, 2015 at 9:10 AM = Typical anti-idist

Of course, in their attempt to insult 8:56am, they happen to affirm the comment..... which, I guess would actually make them an idist.

Or maybe they are playing mind games, which would make them a super egotist.

Damn, everybody has to try to one-up everyone else.

Green's son is a former Bennie staffer. Now he's on the payroll of the City of Jackson as a leftover from Lumumba's stellar leadership. See bio below.

These people are absolute buffoons. Thank God that Judge Weill stands up for what is right.
www.jacksonms.gov/index.aspx?NID=251

civil servant /= public office

elected /= appointed

Thing is, Judge Weill is man enough to laugh this insurrection crap off. Thank God he is there.

The judicail branch is all that keeps us from being a third world country, and look at the other judges. Jackson would surely be (even more so)a third world country were it not for a few good, competent judges.

Yes because the county would be lost if it were not for its "savoir" Judge Weill. Seriously? He maxes out defendants on every case, while that's fine, it doesn't take Learned Hand to figure out that formula.

I have practiced before all of the four Judges in Hinds County for years and I agree that Green has a lot of problems but so does Jeff Weill. He is a tyrant and not a savior, probably the most arrogant Judge in the state. Green is just as bad.

Bill Gowan is the only fair & tough Judge that we have.

And how many cases, 12:22, has Green had appealed and lost as compared to Weill? Staggering numbers. And while I am at it, how many criminal cases does she handle as compared to Weill?

Green is "just as bad"??

Coffee....meet smell.

Just what we need, beanie Thompson getting involved.

This is same moron who stated that there weren't any problems at the Jackson VA. We all know how that turned out. BTW, where was the Clarion Ledger on this story - invisible as usual!
Hopefully, he can get Jesse and Al involved!

As for tommie green - she is an embarrassment. NOW, we have the 'hat woman'! It just keeps getting worse and worse.

With all the above EXPERTS - you do know that the defendants do not qualify to PD Status, right?

I know Judge Weill since he first ran for city council. I will continue to proudly vote for him.

Hold the presses - this isn't beanies' district. So, why don't you spend your time trying to elevate the quality of life for your constituents, who are some of the poorest in the nation.

BTW, how much has your net worth risen since you have been on the government payroll?

All you legal experts, get a grip. We all know what the basis of this character assassination involves!

12:22, I have been wondering how Alison Kelly fares in Judge Gowan's courtroom. Any observers care to share?

2:18, I suggest you look at the most recent map of the 2d Congressional District.

TBA:
That's the thing, she rarely appears before Gowan, Green, or Kidd. She is assigned to Weill's courtroom.

Since she is assigned to Weill's courtroom, she doesn't go before the other judges

I retract that. She might me assigned to both Weill and Gowan. I'll have to double check.

Doh. I knew that last week. Thx y'all!

She has appeared before Judge Gowan and she was in front of Judge Yerger for several years. Judge Yerger always had a good working relationship with her.

I am sure that all the lawyers on this blog know this but Kelly is not the only person that Jeff Weill has had a "beef" with at the courthouse. He let go of one of his baliffs (who was a great baliff and just a good guy) and even fired his court administrator, who had worked for Judge Yerger for several years.

What's your point 4:05?

Weill fired his administrator because he wanted to review her personal cell phone for facebook and emails. She refused. She lost her job.

Weill "fired" his primary bailiff because he felt he was "not loyal".

Weill is popular with lay voters because he is very tough on crime and he is a politician, not a jurist. Kinda like a JP.

6:46,

Are you saying its ok to review an employee's personal cell phone for emails? On her personal email account?

And how is a baliff not loyal? Did he not swear a blood oath to the altar of Weill? He sounds kind of paranoid. Checks employees personal emails and fires a baliff for not being "loyal." We need to get the tin foil out.

6:46 here.

Weill is a nut. You didn't read my post as I intended it.

Well I heard that somebody heard that Weill fired his administrator because she chewed spearmint gum and he only permits peppermint gum in his chambers and someone else I know heard he fired her because she put two lumps of sugar in his coffee instead of one and someone else I know said he fired her because she baked him the wrong kind of cookies. And on the bailiff, I heard Weill fired him because he refused to have a picture of Weill tattooed on his chest as a show of loyalty and somebody else I know said they heard that somebody they knew heard that somebody they saw once said Weill fired the bailiff for refusing to drop to do 100 push-ups while chanting over and over "long live King Weill, long live King Weill".

Come on folks (4:05 thru 8:06) - what in the wide, wide world of sports (movie reference - anyone? anyone?) do any of these pathetically simplistic, almost certainly untrue (or at least incomplete) supposed "causes" for Judge Weill to fire staff have to do with the current controversy between Weill and the PD's office?

9:43 - I didn't post any of those, but several people on this thread & elsewhere have implied that punishing Kelly is okay because she is supposedly a difficult person. So now folks are saying Weill is a difficult person.

I agree that whatever the personality conflicts, they don't affect the merits here. As a judge, you either know how to get along with difficult attorneys, or you emulate the late Harold Cox in managing your courtroom.