Judge bans cameras from courtroom.
Judge Johnny McDaniels postponed Derrick Coleman's trial to December 7 in Hinds County Court. Coleman is appealing a conviction for violating a no-contact order against his wife, Latasha. She has been missing since July 18. A continuance is not unusual, especially in Hinds County. What is unusual is the Court issued the continuance in the middle of Coleman's November 29 trial when it learned the prosecution and defense intended to present video evidence even though the videos were not provided to opposing counsel.
Latasha Coleman filed domestic and malicious mischief charges against her husband on July 17, 2022. A Jackson municipal court issued a no-contact order against him the next day. Derrick went to her home on July 21 and kicked in the door, violating the no-contact order. Latasha filed more charges against her husband on July 22.
Jackson Municipal Court Judge Jeffrey Reynolds ruled on July 25,2022 that Derrick was guilty of violating a no-contact order "related to several domestic violence charges" filed by Latasha. The Court said Derrick was an "extreme danger to the victim" and set his cost bond at $2,500 and appearance bond at $250,000 (KF: Remember July 25, 2022. That date will be very important.)
Derrick's attorney, Damon Stevenson, appealed to Hinds County Court in August 2022 and asked Judge Johnny McDaniels to reduce the bond in an emergency motion filed a week later.
Judge McDaniels agreed with the lawyer and reduced the appearance bond to $50,000 while leaving the cost bond in place in August 2022. He ordered Derrick to wear a GPS monitor for 270 days or "until the appeal is resolved" and kept the no-contact order in place. Derrick never got a GPS monitor as the responsibility for obtaining the device was - wait for it - left to the defendant.
Latasha disappeared on July 18, 2023. Latasha has not been seen since July 18. The police have asked the public for assistance in finding Derrick's wife.
No action took place in the case until Jackson prosecutors filed an emergency motion to revoke his bond on September 14, 2023. Hinds County Court Judge Johnny McDaniels held a hearing on September 29 and revoked his bond after determining he never obtained a GPS monitor. Earlier post and video of hearing.Coleman's trial for violating the no-contact order began on November 29 in Judge McDaniels' courtroom.
Jackson prosecutor Bridgette Morgan opened the hearing by submitting an ore tens motion to dismiss Coleman's appeal, arguing he never paid the $50,000 appearance bond set by the municipal court. The two sides sparred for a half-hour as Coleman's lawyer, Catouche Body, hotly contended the appeal was valid as the city had waited 15 months to file such a motion, thus waiving its right to contest the appeal.
Morgan fired back, stating the case was "unique" due to a "missing person" and there were six domestic violence charges pending against the defendant. Judge McDaniels took it all in and asked yet again why the city waited so long to file such a motion. The city prosecutor blamed the delay on turnover in the chief prosecutor position. She said the chief city prosecutor handled appeals, thus she was not aware of the appeal for quite some time. However, Judge McDaniels pointed out she asked for a trial date and revocation of bond, thus validating the appeal.
The prosecutor said she did not discover the appeal was not perfected until November 28 at the Circuit Clerk's office. She said the Mississippi Rules of Criminal Procedure require Coleman to include the appearance bond when he filed his notice of appeal. "It is another case of him doing what he wants to do," said Morgan. Body said his client complied with the statute. He said the case was about the violation of the no-contact order and not the six domestic violence charges nor Latasha's disappearance. Accepting the motion would deny Derrick's right to due process.
Agreeing with the defendant's lawyer, Judge McDaniels decreed the only issue before the court was whether Derrick Coleman violated the July 2022 no-contact order. He called the city's delay in objecting to the appeal "problematic", stating it should have been filed within 30 days of the notice of appeal while calling the ore tens motion "untimely."
Latasha's friend Funchess testified Derrick "jumped" on Latasha, breaking her ankle and destroying her phone on July 16, 2022. However, the witness admitted she did not witness the alleged assault but was instead repeating what she was told by Latasha. Body repeatedly objected to the testimony. Body and Morgan skirmished until Judge McDaniels asked Morgan if Derrick is a suspect in his wife's disappearance. She said he "is a person of interest" but she was "not privy to the investigation."
Judge McDaniels said "Mrs. Coleman was one of the witnesses in municipal court. I need witnesses to present to this court that he violated the order."
Morgan asked Funchess if she was aware of any contact. The witness replied there was on June 10, 2023 but the defense objection was sustained as it took place after the July 2022 conviction.
Funchess said Derrick caused a disturbance at Latasha's home in July 2022. She said he drove back and forth in a white Suburban. Latasha's friend said she he broke her ankle, forcing her to wear a boot and use the "tricycle." She alleged he also shot up her Camaro. Body got her to admit she never saw Derrick cause the injuries. Funchess stepped down as Latasha's sister, Semiko Crump, took the stand.
Latasha Coleman |
Crump claimed Derrick "always violated" the no-contact order. She said he jumped on her sister and "beat her up." Judge McDaniels sustained Body's objections to each statement. The witness said the defendant repeatedly cussed his wife on the phone through June 2023. Body's objection was sustained.
The skirmishing over Crump's testimony continued. Crump stated Latasha's husband put a tracker on her phone, got cameras, and reset the garage door. Mention was made of a video that was apparently not given to the defense.
Judge McDaniels stopped the proceedings. After conferencing with the attorneys at the bench, he postponed the trial until December 7 after discovering "there are various videos that might be relevant." He ordered both lawyers to conduct discovery.
However, the Court was not through as it admonished both attorneys. "Various motions should have been filed before today by both sides," said Judge McDaniels. He reminded the audience the purpose of the trial is to determine whether Derrick Coleman violated the no-contact order, not whether domestic violence took place or why Latasha Coleman disappeared.
"The Court finds it troubling that I am missing something in this case. He was out on bond for a year before she disappeared. I'd like to know what happened between them. I'd like to have witnesses who can testify what happened in that limited time period at issue (July 18-21, 2022). Judge McDaniels adjourned.
Kingfish note: This trial was one of the sloppiest every witnessed by this correspondent. The prosecutor appeared poorly prepared, constantly invoking mantra of a missing victim and six pending domestic violence charges even though the Court said the only issue was whether Coleman violated the no-contact order prior to July 2022. She constantly slouched against the supporting beam as she addressed the court. The defense lawyer repeatedly addressed the Court with his hands in his pockets. The family left the Hinds County Courthouse obviously disappointed as the case was dragged out yet again because the lawyers could not get their act together.
11 comments:
Filing the bond perfects the appeal. It is jurisdictional, no motion to dismiss is needed. The learned judge should have dismissed the appeal on his own. Read the case law!!
Can you imagine what all this crap is costing taxpayers?
I think 3:09 is right. I'll add that jurisdiction can and should be addressed at any time, on the court's own initiative, as soon as the court becomes aware of it. It cannot be waived by the action/inaction of a party.
This judge is incompetent.
If so, can the prosecutor file an interloc?
KF, If it was a civil case, I would say yes. Not sure about criminal.
This judge is incompetent.
So KF hit the Trifecta of Tools?
You know, some of us readers of this web site get tired of reading half ass lawyers trying to embellish their limited knowledge of law
5:53, In my experience, when a half-ass legal opinion gets posted, those who actually know what they are talking about chime in and correct it.
Since you claim to be able to spot phony lawyers, please identify the statement in the comments that you believe is incorrect/deficient?
Your honor, motion to fix.
bond being jurisdictional is law 101. wow what a shitshow. I
12/5 at 5:53, If it makes you feel any better, I know the jurisdictional implications because I had an appeal dismissed about 9 months after briefing was already complete.
It was a highly-technical reading of two rules of civil procedure, but it backed us into jurisdiction. Right around the time we were expecting an opinion, we got an order of dismissal instead (both appeal and cross-appeal, so neither side saw it coming).
Actually, I don't remember this being taught in law school at all, but that was a long time ago.
Post a Comment