Jackson Jambalaya

Hinds County Court Judge Houston Patton filed an appeal with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and a Motion to Stay with the U.S. District Court in Jackson in the lawsuit filed against him by James Jennings, Jr. Judge Tom Lee ruled against his Motion for Summary Judgment last month. Just remember Judge, you can run, but you can't hide. Motion for Stay, Appeal, Earlier order lifting stay, Earlier post

Woohoo, made my favorite newspaper finally even if it is a blog. ;-) Wall Street Journal's lawblog posted a story today about Judge Lee's ruling against Hinds County Court Judge Houston Patton:

"Federal judge Tom Lee, who serves on the Southern District of Mississippi in Jackson, last week declined to dismiss a libel lawsuit filed against a state judge in Mississippi. That judge, Hinds County Judge Houston Patton, was sued for allegedly stating that another man, James Jennings Jr., and Jennings’s lawyer had tried to bribe Patton. Click here for the story, from the Jackson Clarion-Ledger; click here for the opinion; here for further commentary from something called Jackson Jambalaya...." Post

Made my day.

U. S. District Court Judge Tom Lee ruled against Hinds County Court Judge Houston Patton's motion for summary judgement in the lawsuit filed against him by James Jennings, Jr. The federal judge didn't just rule against Mr. Patton but used some rather strong language in his opinion against the judge. Copy of order, Earlier post (Folo first broke this story two years ago).

Judge Patton threw James Jennings, Jr. in jail for two weeks without charge, hearing, or bond in 1994. Jennings filed a complaint with the Commission on Judicial Performance and prepared to file a lawsuit against Patton. His attorney, Keith Shelton, made a settlement offer to the judge. The judge then contacted the Hinds County District Attorney's office and told them Shelton and Jennings were attempting to extort him. Patton lied to the D.A.'s office, which subsequently prosecuted the pair. Although indicted, the case never went to trial and was later dismissed with prejudice. This is the storyline given by the Mississippi Supreme Court in a finding of fact issued when it reinstated Keith Shelton's law license.

Jennings filed a lawsuit against Patton and Ed Peters in 2008 seeking damages for his false imprisonment and later indictment. Patton and Peters filed motions for summary judgement, claiming they were both immune from the lawsuit as Judge and District Attorney.

Judge Lee agreed with Peters and strongly rejected Patton's attempt to claim immunity for his actions on the bench. The Court cited case law to support its judgement that Patton did not enjoy any immunity for his actions:
"There are only two circumstances under which immunity may be overcome. 'First, a judge is not immune from liability for nonjudicial actions, i.e. actions not taken in the judge's judicial capacity.' 'Second, a judge is not immune from actions, though judicial in nature, taken in the complete absence of all jurisdiction.' The issue here is whether Patton's challenged actions were taken in his judicial capacity, as he contends, or whether they were nonjudicial actions, for which there is no absolute judicial immunity."

The Court stated that "under the version of facts offered by Jennings, which the court accepts as true for present purposes, Patton's action may not be fairly characterized as judicial." Judge Lee states "Plaintiff maintains these (settlement offer of $25,000) were the sole terms of what was a simple settlement proposal, and yet Patton falsely reported to law enforcement officials and signed a formal statement to the effect that Jennings and Shelton had attempted to extort and/or bribe him." The Court didn't stop here but went further and stated "In the court's opinion, based on plaintiff's version of the facts, no reasonable argument can be made that Patton's alleged acts of making false statements to law enforcement and withholding material and exculpatory information to bring about the criminal prosecution of two innocent men are judicial or adjudicative acts." Judge Lee then concludes there are "genuine issues of material fact that preclude summary judgement on this immunity defense."

What is more interesting is the Court found Ed Peters did enjoy immunity from his actions in Jenning's prosecution. Interesting in that in typical Ed Peters fashion, he threw Patton under the bus. Of course his office would have never knowingly prosecuted an innocent man. It was the Judge's fault, he lied to them you see. Well, the Court did say that was exactly the case and that the prosecutors were acting in good faith based on what Judge Patton told them. Thus, Peters escapes, again.

Although Br'er Peters wriggled free yet again, judgement moves closer to Houston Patton, who now must face a trial and explain why he issued a letter de cachet against Jennings and then served him and Keith Shelton up to the District Attorney in an effort to protect his own ass. While he saved his own ass back then, it appears now that it might finally be cooked as there will finally be a trial and Judge Patton will be forced to account for his actions. Does anyone think Jennings will accept a settlement at this point? Stay tuned.

Oh, one other question must be asked: how many other people has Patton thrown in jail without charge or hearing?

Mississippi Bar's finding of fact


Background of Jennings case:
"The nightmare for James Jennings,Jr. began ( According to a finding of fact by the Mississippi Bar) "on September 24, 1993, as a judgement in favor of Jennings in the amount of $35,000 by Judge Houston Patton (p.4)...... Mississippi Bar's Finding of Fact

Jailtime for Jennings
Unfortunately, Jennings was unaware his ex-wife filed telephone harassment charges against him. On February 1, 1994, Justice Court Judge Clyde R. Chapman signed an order and mittimus to place Jennings in the county jail until a bond was posted.... (p.4) On February 11, Justice Court Judge Raymond Bates signed a warant for Jennings' arrest...... It should be pointed out Jenning's ex-wife then hired local attorney James Bell (remember him?). Jennings became the Man in the Iron Mask as Judge Patton sent Jennings back to jail without ever affording Jennings the opportunity to have counsel..... (p.6. He was imprisoned on March 5).

Ten days later, Jennings was still in jail. Bonds were refused, release orders were found, then revoked by judges. Jennings was tried in absentia. His new attorney was not allowed to represent him. Every legal trick in the book to keep Jennings in jail was used as he continued to rot in a Hinds hellhole. Finally his lawyer cornered Judge Patton on March 15. Ms. Pierce spoke with Judge Patton in the foyer of the Hinds County Courthouse and asked Judge Patton what it would do to get Jennings out of jail. Judge Paton replied "get the agreement (giving up his judgement of $35,000) signed." (p.9)

"It became clear to Ms. Pierce that in order for Jennings to be released he would have to give up his $35,000 judgement against Kenney. Mr. Kirstine (Jennings' other lawyer) drafted the agreement for Jennings to sign. Jennings at first emphatically refused to sign the agreement. After much protest, Jennings eventually signed the agreement and was then immediately released.

It is important to note that at no time during Jennings' incarceration was he ever charged or tried for any alleged conduct but instead was simply held in jail until he agree to give up his rightfully obtained judgement against Kenny. Jennings was apparently deprived of due process which would give rise to claims under 42 U.S. Code Section 1983." Jennings sat in jail for nearly two weeks as he became a pinata for Judge Patton and his judicial cronies.

Jennings later filed a complaint against Judge Patton with the Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance and hired Jackson attorney Keith Shelton to represent him in a Section 1983 action against the Hinds County Jurist. It should be noted the narrative for this ordeal is taken directly from the Mississippi Bar's finding of fact and is not just hearsay or some outrageous claim made by Jennings. (There are many more details, including some that are very juicy, but in the interest of presenting a story easier to follow, they have been omitted from this post. Please read the rest of the findings and accompanying affidavits).

The Empire Strikes Back
While discussing a possible settlement of the lawsuit, Judge Patton informed Jennings' lawyer, Shelton, he would settle if he dropped the complaint with the Commission. It is a pretty well established point of judicial ethics in Mississippi that once a complaint is filed against a judge or lawyer, it cannot be dismissed by the person who signed the complaint. The two sides agreed to a sum of $25,000 for settlement, with Judge Patton paying Jennings $5,000 up-front and the rest in installments. Meanwhile, Judge Patton contacted law enforcement and told them Shelton and Jennings were attempting to extort him, while neglecting to mention he himself was the subject of an ethics complaint filed by Jennings and a possible Section 1983 lawsuit.

Patton wore a wire to the meeting. He paid Jennings the $5,000 and both parties signed the settlement agreement. Shelton and Jennings were later arrested and then indicted. The charges were later dismissed as Hinds County Assistant District Attorney Robert Taylor (served from 1982 to 2006). Taylor stated Judge Patton deviated from the script he was given. Taylor said he didn't understand why they were indicted and said seeking the indictments "was an egregious error". Taylor testified to the bar "it's clear in retrospect we didn't get the complete story."

James Jennings filed a lawsuit against Hinds County Court Judge Houston Patton and former Hinds County District Attorney Ed Peters yesterday in federal court in Jackson. The lawsuit claimed Judge Patton illegally confined Jennings in order to "coerce him to forego a civil judgement" and that Peters engaged in a conspiracy with Patton to indict and prosecute Jennings under false pretenses.
Jennings' Complaint Against Houston Patton and Ed Peters

The nightmare for James Jennings began ( According to a finding of fact by the Mississippi Bar) "on September 24, 1993, as a judgement in favor of Jennings in the amount of $35,000 by Judge Houston Patton (p.4)...... Mississippi Bar's Finding of Fact

Jailtime for Jennings
Unfortunately, Jennings was unaware his ex-wife filed telephone harassment charges against him. On February 1, 1994, Justice Court Judge Clyde R. Chapman signed an order and mittimus to place Jennings in the county jail until a bond was posted.... (p.4) On February 11, Justice Court Judge Raymond Bates signed a warant for Jennings' arrest...... It should be pointed out Jenning's ex-wife then hired local attorney James Bell (remember him?). Jennings became the Man in the Iron Mask as Judge Patton sent Jennings back to jail without ever affording Jennings the opportunity to have counsel..... (p.6. He was imprisoned on March 5).

Ten days later, Jennings was still in jail. Bonds were refused, release orders were found, then revoked by judges. Jennings was tried in absentia. His new attorney was not allowed to represent him. Every legal trick in the book to keep Jennings in jail was used as he continued to rot in a Hinds hellhole. Finally his lawyer cornered Judge Patton on March 15. Ms. Pierce spoke with Judge Patton in the foyer of the Hinds County Courthouse and asked Judge Patton what it would do to get Jennings out of jail. Judge Paton replied "get the agreement (giving up his judgement of $35,000) signed." (p.9)

"It became clear to Ms. Pierce that in order for Jennings to be released he would have to give up his $35,000 judgement against Kenney. Mr. Kirstine (Jennings' other lawyer) drafted the agreement for Jennings to sign. Jennings at first emphatically refused to sign the agreement. After much protest, Jennings eventually signed the agreement and was then immediately released.

It is important to note that at no time during Jennings' incarceration was he ever charged or tried for any alleged conduct but instead was simply held in jail until he agree to give up his rightfully obtained judgement against Kenny. Jennings was apparently deprived of due process which would give rise to claims under 42 U.S. Code Section 1983." Jennings sat in jail for nearly two weeks as he became a pinata for Judge Patton and his judicial cronies.

Jennings later filed a complaint against Judge Patton with the Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance and hired Jackson attorney Keith Shelton to represent him in a Section 1983 action against the Hinds County Jurist. It should be noted the narrative for this ordeal is taken directly from the Mississippi Bar's finding of fact and is not just hearsay or some outrageous claim made by Jennings. (There are many more details, including some that are very juicy, but in the interest of presenting a story easier to follow, they have been omitted from this post. Please read the rest of the findings and accompanying affidavits).

The Empire Strikes Back
While discussing a possible settlement of the lawsuit, Judge Patton informed Jennings' lawyer, Shelton, he would settle if he dropped the complaint with the Commission. It is a pretty well established point of judicial ethics in Mississippi that once a complaint is filed against a judge or lawyer, it cannot be dismissed by the person who signed the complaint. The two sides agreed to a sum of $25,000 for settlement, with Judge Patton paying Jennings $5,000 up-front and the rest in installments. Meanwhile, Judge Patton contacted law enforcement and told them Shelton and Jennings were attempting to extort him, while neglecting to mention he himself was the subject of an ethics complaint filed by Jennings and a possible Section 1983 lawsuit.

Patton wore a wire to the meeting. He paid Jennings the $5,000 and both parties signed the settlement agreement. Shelton and Jennings were later arrested and then indicted. The charges were later dismissed as Hinds County Assistant District Attorney Robert Taylor (served from 1982 to 2006). Taylor stated Judge Patton deviated from the script he was given. Taylor said he didn't understand why they were indicted and said seeking the indictments "was an egregious error". Taylor testified to the bar "it's clear in retrospect we didn't get the complete story."

Taylor revealed some other important facts in an internal memo:
"After examining the transcript of the conversation, it was determined that Judge Patton had deviated from the script given to him in many material ways. Also, it was agreed the suspects had not said things which were quite incriminating enough. Everyone who reviewd the case at that time, agreed there now was no case against either Shelton or Jennings. I was not one of the persons who reviewed the case. I know that Tommy Mayfield, Ed Peters, and another Assistant did. Again, it was agreed there was NO CASE.
Then for reasons which are unclear to me, and will never be clear, the case against Shelton and Jennings is presented with the recommendation of this office that True bills (indictments) be returned as to both defendants for Conspiracy and Bribery. This was in fact done....
This case lacks, and has never had any prosecutive merit. The decision to send it on to the Grand Jury was an egregious error......" Robert Taylor Memo (Kingfish note: Do any of these names sound familiar? See The Robbie Bell Case Family Tree)

However, Taylor also testified his boss, Ed Peters (who was D.A. when Jennings was arrested and indicted), would indict defendants on a "dare" just to see if he could get away with it. It should also be noted Taylor was a partner of Tom Royals when Royals defended Peters in the NASA case in the 1970's. See Ed Peters: Do Leopards Ever Change Their Spots? Taylor stated he was not sure who indicted Jennings, as it could have been one of any number of prosecutors but that once he became aware of the flaws and misrepresentations in the case, he moved to dismiss it.

Jennings Files Complaint against Peters and Patton
The complaint states "Unbeknownst to Mr. Shelton and Mr. Jennings, the Defendant Patton had contacted the Hinds County District Attorney’s Office and falsely and maliciously claimed that Mr. Shelton and Mr. Jennings were attempting to bribe him. The Defendant Patton’s initiation of criminal charges against Mr. Jennings and Mr. Shelton did not constitute a judicial act. On, or about, April 16, 2008, Mr. Jennings and the Defendant Patton signed a settlement agreement and release which ostensibly resolved Mr. Jennings’ civil rights claim.

After consummating the settlement, the Defendant Patton left and Mr. Jennings and Mr. Shelton were arrested as a direct result of the false and malicious claim by the Defendant Patton that Mr. Jennings and Mr. Shelton were attempting to bribe him. The Defendant Patton in making a criminal complaint and preparing an affidavit which he knew was false and in withholding exculpatory evidence initiated a prosecution of Mr. Jennings without probable cause.

Mr. Jennings was indicted by a Hinds County Grand Jury on August 14, 1997, for the felony offense of bribery based on the false affidavit and/or the false testimony of the Defendant Patton. The false affidavit and/or the false testimony of the Defendant Patton invalidated the probable cause determination of the Hinds County Grand Jury.

The Defendant Peters was at all times relevant to this civil action the Hinds County District Attorney. The Defendant Patton and the Defendant Peters, pre-indictment, individually and in combination, fabricated evidence and withheld exculpatory evidence for the sole-purpose of prosecuting Mr. Jennings without probable cause.

The Defendant Peters, pre-indictment, also rendered eroneous and false legal advice to the police and others regarding the existence of probable cause to arrest Mr. Jennings based on the fabricated evidence and withheld exculpatory evidence for the sole-purpose of prosecuting Mr. Jennings without probable cause...."

Jennings requests the following remedies:
"1. actual damages in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact;
2. compensatory damages for emotional distress, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, humiliation, shame, loss of self-esteem, fear, embarrassment, and injury to reputation and professional standing which Mr. Jennings has suffered or may suffer in the future;
3. punitive damages;
4. reasonable attorney’s fees; and
5. reasonable costs;"

There is no record of service of process for Peters and Patton of the lawsuit yet. Credit must be given to the website FOLO, http://www.folo.us/, which originally published details of this nightmare in The Shelton Series. Sources have also informed Jackson Jambalaya a complaint was filed several months ago with the Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance against Judge Patton for his performance in this affair. The disposition of the complaint is not yet known at this time.