Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
NO. 2016-KM-00546-SCT
v.
STATE OF MISSISIPPI
1. Criminal contempt involves an act which tends to bring the court into disrepute or
disrespect.1 In this case, Christopher Scott Routh was found in direct criminal contempt
after the bond hearing had been concluded and despite being directed by the judge to sit
1
Purvis v. Purvis, 657 So. 2d 794, 797 (Miss. 1994) (quoting Lawson v. State, 573
So. 2d 684, 686 (Miss. 1990)).
down and make any further argument by written motion. Because the record supports the
at her arraignment hearing. Routh is an attorney with the Hinds County Public Defenders
3. Prior to the hearing, Blackwell had been out on bond, under house arrest. Routh
requested Blackwell remain on bond and under house arrest. Routh argued his client had a
constitutional right to reasonable bail. He also asserted the State had no evidence linking her
to the crime.
4. The State responded that its policy is to request bond be denied to those charged with
capital murder, and Blackwell should be no exception. The State argued, contrary to Rouths
no-evidence claim, that Blackwells DNA had been found at the murder scene, plus she had
given incriminating statements to the police. Moreover, Blackwell posed a flight risk, having
no ties to Hinds County. The State also pointed out that the only reason Blackwell had been
granted bond previously was because she was pregnant. And now that her child was born,
5. At this point, the circuit judge asked Routh about Blackwells infant, whom she had
brought with her to the hearing. Routh responded that the baby had a certain digestive
condition that required his mother breast-feed him. The judge asked what evidence Routh
had to support this contention. At first, Routh equivocated, saying he was not familiar with
2
the exact condition but that was what his client told him. But then Routh began talking about
a hospital discharge form. When asked if he wanted to introduce the form into evidence,
Routh said yes. But before offering it, the judge permitted the State to review the form. The
State pointed out that the document was a general discharge form from the hospital. It
merely directed the baby be regularly fed breast milk or formula. After reviewing the record
himself, the judge agreed the document contained no diagnosis of a gastrointestinal issue and
no prescription for breast milk only. Because the form Routh presented stated the infant
could be fed formula instead of breast milk, the judge found no compelling reason to grant
But the judge then immediately advised he would reconsider [his decision] upon the filing
7. At this point, the judge turned to Blackwell and asked if she had funds to hire a
lawyer. When she answered no, the judge told her he would appoint someone to represent
her. Blackwell, audibly upset,2 then asked if she could speak. The judge responded that he
did not believe now would be the time. But he reassured her that her appointed attorney
2
The audio-recording of the arraignment hearing is part of the record.
3
8. As a final matter, the judge asked if there was a family member who could take care
of Blackwells child or should social services be called. After Routh assured the judge the
baby could go with Blackwells relative who was in the courtroom, the judge concluded the
hearing.
9. At this point, Routh interjected, asking if he could make an argument. The judge told
him he could not because the hearing was over. Routh launched into his argument anyway.
At the same time the judge was asking him to sit down, Routh asserted that the Constitution
required the reason denying bail be placed on the record. He then accused the judge of
failing to do so.
10. The judge found Routh in direct criminal contempt. After a ten-minute recess, the
Mr. Routh, you had plenty of opportunity to make a record today and make
your arguments. Ill note that you blatantly misrepresented something on the
record today. After I made my ruling, I had told you I was not going to hear
any further argument and you repeatedly refused my directive to sit down. I
advised you to file a detailed written motion if you had anything else to present
on this issue, and Ill still consider any written motion on the bond issue.
Because you were held in direct criminal contempt and because of your refusal
to abide by the rules of this court, Im going to sentence you to spend some
time in jail. Im going to commit you to the custody of the sheriff of Hinds
County for the afternoon until 5:00 p.m.
11. Routh immediately filed an emergency petition with this Court, which was deemed
in part to be a notice of appeal of the contempt finding. This Court also granted Rouths
request for bond, permitting Routh to be released that day upon posting a $500 supersedeas
bond.
4
Discussion
12. The only question on appeal is whether the record, viewed ab initio, supports finding
Routh in direct criminal contempt beyond a reasonable doubt. See Mingo v. State, 944 So.
on the record whether the person in contempt is guilty of contempt beyond a reasonable
13. Conduct directed against the courts dignity and authority is criminal contempt.
Purvis v. Purvis, 657 So. 2d 794, 797 (Miss. 1994). It involves an act which tends to bring
the court into disrepute or disrespect. Id. (quoting Lawson v. State, 573 So. 2d 684, 686
(Miss. 1990)). Here, Routh challenged the dignity and authority of the trial court when he
interjected his argument after the judge had ruled on the bond issue, clearly instructed Routh
any further argument should be made by written motion, ended the hearing, denied Rouths
request to make further oral argument, and directed Routh to sit down.
14. On appeal, Routh argues he was asserting his clients constitutional rightnamely,
the constitutional requirement that, [i]n any case where bail is denied before conviction, the
judge shall place in the record his reasons for denying bail. Miss. Const. art. 3, 29(4).
According to Routh, an attorney respectfully asking for a trial court to follow Constitutional
3
Whether the contempt is civil or criminal hinges on the purpose of the contempt
finding. If the primary purpose of the contempt order is to enforce the rights of private
party litigants or enforce compliance with a court order, then the contempt is civil. Mingo,
944 So. 2d at 32. But if the purpose is to punish the contemnor for disobedience of a court
order, then the contempt is criminal. Id. Here, the purpose of the contempt finding was
to punish Routh for disobeying the judges order to sit down. So the contempt was clearly
criminal, prompting this Courts heightened review.
5
law can never warrant criminal contempt. The problem with this argument is that the
transcript clearly shows the judge had followed the Constitution. Before denying bond, the
judge explained his reasons for doing so(1) the fact the crime was capital and punishable
by death, (2) the need to protect the public, (3) the States strong evidence against Blackwell,
and (4) the lack of evidence to support Rouths contention that Blackwells baby required
breast milk. See Miss. Const. art. 3, 29(1) (providing all persons shall, before conviction,
be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for capital offenses . . . when the proof is evident or
presumption great (emphasis added)). So the judge had already complied with this
constitutional requirement before the acts giving rise to the criminal contempt. Thus, Routh
the hearing had ended and while he was being asked to sit down. At this point, Routh was
15. Moreover, had Routh believed the judge had not followed the Constitution when
denying bond, Routh could have made this argument in a written motion. While the judge
denied bond, he promised to reconsider his decision upon the filing of the proper motion
with proper evidence. But instead of filing a motion, Routh chose to disrupt the court.
16. The contempt power is an important tool for keeping order and maintaining an
efficient court system. In re Hoppock, 849 So. 2d 1275, 1278 (Miss. 2003). We find the
judge was trying to maintain order in his courtroom in the midst of a difficult situationa
new mother distraught over being denied bond and having to leave her baby with a relative.
Routh made the courtroom more chaotic by standing up to dispute the judges ruling after the
6
hearing had ended and despite being ordered to sit down, thereby prevent[ing] the orderly
administration of justice. In re Williamson, 838 So. 2d 226, 237 (Miss. 2002) (Direct
criminal contempt involves words spoken or actions committed in the presence of the court
that are calculated to embarrass or prevent the orderly administration of justice.). In doing
of Professional Conduct 3.5(d). Thus, we find the judge was within his authority to find
Conclusion
17. Disrupting the court by disputing a judges rulingafter being expressly told not
18. AFFIRMED.
7
FILED
APR 13 2016
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI OFFICE Of THE:. C.L~ni,
SUPAEM~ COURT
COURT OF APPEALS
IN THE MATTER OF CHRISTOPHER
SCOTT ROUTH, PETITIONER No.JDt~-m .. {3-;
EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS OR,
IN THE ALTERNATIVE, BAIL FROM CONSTRUCTIVE CONTEMPT FINDING
AND DENIAL OF STAY OR BOND BY CIRCUIT JUDGE JEFF WEILL
COMES NOW, Merrida Coxwell, attorney for Christopher Scott Routh ("Chris Routh"
or "Mr. Routh"), a licensed Mississippi attorney in good standing and employed by the Hinds
County Public Defender's Office, and for cause would show the following:
1.
ORIGINAL
On April 13, 2016, attorneys Eric Brown and Chris Routh were appearing in
Court for arraignment and a bond hearing for a client charged with criminal offense. The Client
had originally been released on bail by the County Court. At the time of the client's
arraignment, Judge Weill took argument from the State on whether to continue the bail, raise the
bail, or grant no bail. Attorney Routh had spoken for accused and afterwards the State requested
2. Judge Weill granted the State's request to revoke the bail of the accused and
attorney Routh asked Judge Weill to consider the findings on the record under Huff v. Edwards,
241 So. 2d 654 (Miss. 1970). The accused was in court with a three (3) month old baby and both
she and the baby began crying. There was no one available to take custody of the baby who was
breast fed. Attorney Routh, as an advocate, requested a finding on why bail for the accused was
being denied and Judge Weill immediately said he wanted order in court. He took a ten (10)
minute break and held Mr. Routh in direct criminal contempt and ordered him incarcerated until
five (5) o'clock today. Attached as Exhibit "A" is an Affidavit from attorney Michael Eric
2016 .. , u;.,1
Brown detailing the hearing today. MQ110Nff
3. According to MC.A., Section 11-51-11, (Miss. 1972), Mr. Routh is entitled to a
bond in an amount no greater than Two Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($2,000.00), which will
act as supersedeas while he appeals his conviction for criminal contempt to this Court. After
Judge Weill found Mr. Routh in direct criminal contempt, Assistant Public Defender Eric Brown,
who had been present the entire time, requested a stay which was immediately denied by Judge
Will. Judge Weill further ordered Mr. Brown to sit down and not say another word. Mr. Brown,
in fear of being put in jail himself, sat down while Mr. Routh was taken in custody by the Hinds
County Sheriffs Department. The oral order of Judge Weill sentenced Mr. Routh to the jail until
4. Attorney Merrida Coxwell immediately emailed Judge Weill asking if there was a
misunderstanding and requested that he set bail in accordance with M.C.A. Section 11-51-11
(Miss. 1972). A copy of thee mail to Judge Weill with a copy to Ivon Johnson, Assistant District
5. Due to the short time period counsel for Mr. Routh is not able to track down
Judge Weill.
immediate bail pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated, Section 11-51-11, or in the alternative,
BY:
2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Merrida Coxwell, counsel of record for the Petitioner, Chris Routh, do hereby certify
that I have this day caused the above and foregoing Emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus or, in the Alternative, Bail From Constructive Contempt Finding and Denial of Stay
or Bond by Circuit Judge Jeff Weill to be served, via electronic mail, upon the following
persons of interest:
OF COUNSEL:
3
AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL ERIC BROWN
PERSONALLY CAME AND APPEARED BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, the
within named Michael Eric Brown, who after being duly sworn states on his oath that the matters and
facts set forth herein are true and correct to the best of his memory and ability:
7. I am currently employed as an attorney with the Office of the Hinds County Public
Defender.
9. I, Michael Eric Brown, would like to give a statement regarding the arraignment
proceeding held in the Hinds County Circuit Court on April 13, 2016. At the arraignment of Loran
Danielle Shell-Blackwell, Cause No. 16-0-146, I was present along with my co-counsel, Christopher
Routh, Mississippi Bar Number 104579. Our office was appointed to represent Ms. Shell-Blackwell
on September 8, 2015 by the Honorable Judge Clayton in Jackson Municipal Court. Mr. Routh, along
with other attorneys with the Hinds County Public Defender's Office, again represented Ms. Shell-
Blackwell at her preliminary hearing held on September 16, 2016 before Judge Priester in Hinds
County Court. In accordance with the En Banc Order In re: Office of the Hinds County Public
EXHIBIT
Page 1 of 4
9. At the arraignment hearing on April 13, 2016, the Honorable Judge Jeff Weill, Sr. asked
Ms. Shell-Blackwell on two (2) separate occasions whether she could hire an attorney or whether she
had an attorney. She replied "no" and represented she has not hired an attorney.
10. Counsel for both the State and Defendant were given the opportunity to present
argument on the issue of bail. Ms. Shell-Blackwell was on bond at the time of the hearing. After the
State argued bond be denied for Ms. Shell-Blackwell, Mr. Routh countered the State's argument citing
legal precedent, and rebuttal was allowed by the State and Mr. Routh.
11. Before Judge Weill ordered "no bond", Ms. Shell-Blackwell, who was holding an infant
born December 30, 2015, began crying uncontrollably while screaming and continued this during the
process of being cuffed and taken into custody by the Hinds County Sheriffs Department. Judge Weill
then said he would "appoint someone to represent" Ms. Shell-Blackwell, even though Christopher
Routh was in court, representing Ms. Shell-Blackwell. After Judge Weill had ordered no bond and
during the process of Ms. Shell-Blackwell crying and screaming, Judge Weill stated he had ruled on
the matter and told Mr. Routh to "be seated." Mr. Routh stated that Ms. Shell-Blackwell had a
constitutional right to bond and at least a hearing to determine the credibility of the evidence against
12. Judge Weill found Mr. Routh in direct criminal contempt and took - for reasons unclear
- a "10-minute break" to counsel with his law clerk. After returning from his break, Judge Weill
stressed the importance of keeping "order" in his courtroom and then sentenced Mr. Routh to the
custody of the Hinds County Sheriffs Department until 5:00 p.m. At no time did Judge Weill order
13. I asked Judge Weill for a stay and he denied it and told me not to say another word. I
was afraid if I asked for anything else or said another word Judge Weill would also hold me in
contempt so I said nothing else. At all times in the proceedings we were acting professional and not
Page 2 of 4
being disrespectful to the court. Both Mr. Routh and I are assigned to Judge Weill's Court by the Hinds
County Public Defender. I do not believe Mr. Routh did anything to be held in direct criminal
contempt and as an attorney I would myself state that an appeal should be taken
I gave this affidavit independently and voluntarily with a full understanding of my rights. No
person has threatened me to say this. To the best of my knowledge, this affidavit is true and accurate.
It has been given in my own words, with nobody advising me of what to say. I have made no changes
to this document and have been allowed to do so after I read it and before I signed this document.
Page 3 of 4
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
COUNTY OF HINDS
PERSONALLY APPEARED BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority of law in and for the
State and County aforesaid, the within named MICHAEL ERIC BROWN who, after having been by
me first duly sworn, stated on her oath that the matters, facts, and allegations contained and set forth in
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME, THIS the 13th day of April, 2016.
Page 4 of 4
Merrida Coxwell
I am representing attorney Christopher Scott Routh in an appeal from your order holding him in contempt. According to
Miss. Code Annotated, Section 11-51-11, Mr. Routh is entitled to appeal with a bond no greater than $2,000.00. I was
obviously not present and may have been mistaken in the understanding that you denied a stay and would not permit
the other attorney to speak any more to request an appeal bond. I am by this email requesting notification from you of
the amount of bail set by order in an amount no greater than $2,000.00 so Mr. Routh may secure his release and appeal
as all other litigants. Thank you for your attention to this matter, Merrida Coxwell
Coxwell&'ssociatesr11 (
0: 601-948-1600 F: 601-948-7097
500 North State St Jackson MS 39201
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1337 Jackson, MS 39215-1337
http://www.coxwelllaw.com
EXHIBIT
I rS
Merrida Coxwell
I am representing attorney Christopher Scott Routh in an appeal from your order holding him in contempt. According to
Miss. Code Annotated, Section 11-51-11, Mr. Routh is entitled to appeal with a bond no greater than $2,000.00. I was
obviously not present and may have been mistaken in the understanding that you denied a stay and would not permit
the other attorney to speak any more to request an appeal bond. I am by this email requesting notification from you of
the amount of bail set by order in an amount no greater than $2,000.00 so Mr. Routh may secure his release and appeal
as all other litigants. Thank you for your attention to this matter, Merrida Coxwell
(jf:_ Coxwel\i'.ssociatesr11 (
Merrida "Buddy" Coxwell / Attorney At Law
Coxwell and Associates, PLLC
merridac@coxwelllaw.com
0: 601-948-1600 F: 601-948-7097
500 North State St Jackson MS 39201
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1337 Jackson, MS 39215-1337
http://www.coxwelllaw.com
1
FILED
APR 13 2016
Serial: 205314
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT
COURT OF APPEALS
No. 2016-M-00535
ORDER
This matter is before the panel of Randolph, P .J ., Kitchens and King, JJ ., on the
Emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Or, in the Alternative, Bail From
Constructive Contempt Finding and Denial of Stay or Bond by Circuit Court Judge J effWeill
filed by Christopher Scott Routh. The Clerk of this Court has attempted to contact Judge
Weill but has been unsuccessful. The panel finds that the petition should be deemed in part
to be a notice of appeal from the finding of contempt. Routh argues that he is entitled to post
bond pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. 11-51-11. After due consideration, the panel finds that
the petition should be granted in part. The panel finds that Routh shall be immediately
released from custody upon posting bond in the amount of five hundred dollars ($500) which
will act as supersedeas while he appeals his conviction for criminal contempt to this Court.
Corpus Or, in the Alternative, Bail From Constructive Contempt Finding and Denial of Stay