11th Circuit OKs in-cell trial of defendant who said he would come to court 'kicking and screaming'
A defendant has a constitutional right to be present at his own trial.
But what if he insists on creating a disruption there, shouting and physically acting out?
That was the issue that confronted a federal judge in Atlanta in 2011. Then-Chief District Judge Julie Carnes did not err in arranging for Jean-Daniel Perkins to watch his own $4 million credit-card fraud trial from a courthouse holding cell, a federal appeals court has ruled (PDF).
Carnes visited the holding cell in person, along with lawyers for both sides and a court reporter, before reaching this resolution. Earlier, Perkins had refused to leave the cell, telling U.S. marshals he would come to court “kicking and screaming” if they forced him to do so. Once the judge arrived, he shouted at her: “I am here against my will!” among other statements.
Back in court, Carnes told Perkins he was welcome to join his lawyer at the defense table at any time instead of simply watching the proceedings from the cell on a closed-circuit television hookup, the Daily Report (sub. req.) recounts.
After Perkins was convicted, Carnes denied a new-trial motion, saying that she had little choice but to do what she did: If Perkins had been forced to come to court to face trial, he would have had to be chained and muzzled to prevent him from shouting and physically acting out. And that would have prejudiced him in front of the jury, the judge pointed out.
The defense also argued that Perkins’ behavior was a result of mental illness, but was sabotaged by jailhouse phone recordings in which the defendant discussed with family members the implications of being “present” at trial.
The 11th Circuit upheld Carnes’ approach in a unanimous June 1 decision, saying that “the record in this case leaves no doubt that Mr. Perkins planned to sabotage the criminal proceedings against him.”
Carnes is herself now on the 11th Circuit bench.
