The Mississippi Supreme Court issued the following statement.
The Mississippi Supreme Court on Friday, Sept. 4, issued an order allowing plea hearings in felony cases to be
conducted by video conference to reduce the spread of COVID-19 in jails.
Chief Justice Mike Randolph signed Emergency Administrative Order 16 today. The order said that trial judges have
the discretion to use interactive audiovisual equipment to conduct plea hearings.
The order said that allowing plea hearings to be conducted by video appearance is “in the interest of balancing
the health risks presented by COVID-19 with the courts’ constitutional and statutory duty to remain open and accessible.”
The Supreme Court said that video conferencing for a plea hearing can be done only if a defendant willingly agrees
to this method, and only if the defense attorney is physically present with the defendant. The Court issued these requirements:
(1) a full record of the proceedings shall be made, which may include an electronic recording (digitally or on
tape);
(2) after consultation with counsel, the defendant shall provide
written consent to the use of “interactive audiovisual
equipment” during the proceedings;
(3) the court shall determine that the defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily agrees to appear at
the proceeding by interactive audiovisual means; and
(4) counsel shall be physically present with the defendant during the
proceedings, with each taking appropriate
and/or mandated measures to minimize the potential transmission of
COVID-19 (e.g., face coverings over the nose and mouth; social
distancing), and provisions shall be made to allow for confidential
communications between the defendant and counsel before and
during the proceeding.
On March 25, the Mississippi Attorney General and the State Public
Defender filed a joint motion requesting the
Supreme Court to adopt a temporary rule suspension that would allow
felony plea hearings, sentencing hearings and probation violation
hearings to be done by way of interactive audiovisual equipment. The
request was made in an effort to prevent the introduction
of COVID-19 into jails. The Supreme Court on March 26 declined to
allow plea hearings by video conference, but agreed to temporarily
suspend Rule1.8(c) of the Mississippi Rules of Criminal Procedure to
allow sentencing hearings and probation violation hearings
to be conducted by video conference.
The President of the United States signed the CARES Act the next day,
March 27. The CARES Act authorized federal
courts to use video conferencing, under certain circumstances, for
various criminal proceedings during the COVID-19 emergency, including
felony pleas.
The Supreme Court on Aug. 5 said it would reconsider the issue of trial
courts using video conferences to conduct
plea hearings. The Court told the Attorney General and the State Public
Defender to provide more information via supplemental briefs.
State Defender Andre’ de Gruy in a document filed Aug. 11 said, “The
purpose of our request in March and still
today is to protect the health and safety of detainees while ensuring
their constitutional rights are protected as well. Protection of this
vulnerable population also protects everyone involved in the system
including jailors, court personnel and defense lawyers
but the defendant's rights must be paramount.”
The office of the Attorney General asked the Court in a document filed
Aug. 20 to protect vulnerable populations
of jails by “vesting complete discretion in Mississippi’s trial court
judges to decide on a case-by-case bases whether in-person hearings can
be conducted safely or should be handled remotely.”
The Attorney General noted that all U.S. District Courts in Mississippi
as well as in neighboring states use video
conferences for accepting felony pleas. The Attorney General wrote that
after the CARES Act allowed federal district courts to utilize video
conferences to conduct plea hearings, “all federal district courts in
Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana,
and Tennessee have found that felony plea proceedings cannot be
conducted in person without seriously jeopardizing public health and
safety and authorized the use of interactive audiovisual technology for
these proceedings where the defendant consents and
the court specifically finds that the plea cannot be delayed without
serious harm to the interests of justice.”
Emergency Administrative Order16 is at this link:
6 comments:
" On March 25, the Mississippi Attorney General and the State Public Defender filed a joint motion requesting the Supreme Court to adopt a temporary rule suspension that would allow felony plea hearings, sentencing hearings and probation violation hearings to be done by way of interactive audiovisual equipment. "
All of that is well and good.
I'm all for interactive audiovisual equipment.
Some call this basic video.
It's' been common for over twenty years.
While I'm happy the health of the staff is being considered, I won't ask any questions about new furniture, interior decorations or such within the AG's office.
Only took them 6 months into the pandemic to approve it
@5:03PM
What is the obsession with the AG's office decor? Every executive in the world decorates their office. What exactly are you criticizing? What is your point? Or are you simply a bitter white male misogynist with no point beyond your disdain for women?
9:11, i would suggest you attempt to educate yourself about the history of excessive spending on the part of Fitch in her previous positions as that is obviously what was referenced in the post you criticize. For a conservative, she sure does like to spend the taxpayers money. Unfortunately, when she is called out on it, she does what you just did and claim misogyny. The post you criticize was not my post, i am posting for the first time in this thread and doing so for the simple purpose of challenging you to actually argue with facts and not name-calling. Happy Labor Day!
Thanks 11:31.
That was exactly my point.
Great first post !
I hope we see more of your observations.
@9:11, Maybe executives in the private sector decorates their offices, but State employees, and she is just an employee, cannot just start spending public money on office furniture unless something is broken. I've worked in several different State buildings, and that just doesn't happen. I can't imagine how much it would cost to change office furniture every time there was an employee turnover. Her staff probably needs office supplies that they can't get because she used a big portion of the budget replacing perfectly good furniture.
Post a Comment