two cases for me this morning person will call up his calvin kennedy versus clay county mississippi cooper maker for clay county mississippi and the executive officer responsible for the detention and transport of clay county detainees imposed a detention sentence upon calvin candy that began january  and thirteen and continued there after for two hundred and sixty four days and this detention sentence was prologue to an unconstitutional thus negating share of scott's defense a qualified immunity and warranting reversal of the district court's finding in favor of sheriff scott calvin kennedy's th amendment due process right to not be hailed for an extended period without further process was clearly and thirty six dollars of that opinion the right at issue was clearly established and its contours sufficiently clear that any reasonable official would understand that the constitution forbids confining criminal defendants prolonged period prior to bringing them before the court understand here on his concerns about what facts will satisfy the qualified immunity standard as it relates to what constitutes about lation of rights and what is a prolonged detention with regard to same we respectfully submit the facts of mr kennedy's case will address those concerns of the court the st query is whether there was a violation of mr candid he's clearly established constitutional right the bench warrant issued by a circuit court judge coleman in october two thousand and twelve commanded the sheriff not only to arrest and detain mr candy but to also bring him before the clay county circuit court to answer why he did not appear at the st day of the october two thousand and twelve term the next term court for clay county circuit court was january rd tain their court only his word for terms your court terms of out of curiosity how many weeks out of a term or are judges there i mean there are just a few weeks each quarter are each of those times are on of the court convenes the st monday and they remain in session for ten days there but it's a small county oh yes ma'am it is yes your honor my understanding is he was represented by counsel the entire time your honor that is not correct and let me suggest that mr he would have met with mr home for his then appoint it public defender to discuss the case to discuss his innocence and the famed case that had brought him mr don dale garrett who during canada's detention was also detained in the clay county jail because as the record reflects when judge coleman entered the order to no prost the case against mr kennedy the court cited specifically that the state could not make its case because it could not find a material witness mr donahoe garrett who purportedly had given a statement to the west point police department back in march of tw that defend it was also in the clay county jail along with mystic hannity throughout his prolonged detention good grief well but mr h and twelve there would have the custom is for the sheriff to respond to the bench warrant whether counsel is appointed or not but in this instance m hannity had been appointed the public defender and in common practice in mississippi the detainee will meet with the public defender in court so the onus was on sheriff scott to respond to the bench warrant to bring this to candidate before the court by denying him his appearance before the court he also denied him the opportunity to meet with counsel to discuss his innocence the feigned statements that had been l against him by done deal garrett and also your honor to have the the case set for the very next term which would have been april two thousand and thirty but is that it is the evidence of this custom scott testified that the bench warrant issued by objects coleman was an order from the court cited at the record at pages six o two dollars and six dollars o three and i quote the only way that he can get out of jail on a bench warrant is he's got to go before the judge and that's not going to happen if his attorney is not there close quote at page six hundred and twenty eight of the record excuse me mr kennedy had his judge our circuit clerk mr harold testified that not only had he placed missed a candidate his motion to dismiss the indictment and be brought before the court and the executed return of the bench warrant as well as placing this to candy's name on the progress sheet and the docket call for january rd tain the circuit clerk at may preparation for this to kennedy to be before the court pursuant to the duly served and executed bench warrant part the case was continued in january had that happen because mr hannity had not britain been brought before the court your honor when mr quiet quiet week so the dad could see suggest that mr hall for its name was scratched out and mr client staying was placed i can only suggest your honor that that would have happened sometime after pertinent parties testify during the bench trial yes you're ok so you cited the charge is in we've got jones and some other cases so which is the best case you think is closes to yours in terms of relief you seek on qualified immunity well your honor i think the joint standard sets forth and certainly our case furthers that of that what every reasonable share should know relative to that share of scott's conduct in failing to bring him before the court on january rd was not object of lee reasonable you are now understand the court raising the question about summary judgment but judge davidson as he considered the question of qualified immunity for sheriff scott in his nd motion for summary judgment specifically had concerns about whether the share pleasant title to it or exactly and i was only not concerned about it just noting that more often than not when we hear these there is a summary judgment coming here you had a full bench trial your standpoint to me is a good thing because all the evidence is laid out judge davidson and institutional way things are set up but the end of the day the pivotal day the day in question was january rd the day that the court had turned the day that the the sheriff head every opportunity to bring mr kennedy before the court that was the determinative and dispositive day on that day mr kennedy would have been before judge coleman himself he would have had opportunity to further unfortunate series of mistakes but they but you were saying that he should have been tried on april in april of two thousand and thirteen and what i'm saying i understand the record to show is that but for his counsel's moving for continuance he would have been set for trial on in april and there would have been also yana the opportunity to further discuss his innocence and the famed case  got agreed that the bench warrant the language in the bench warrant was that talks about instant turn but it does not and judge coleman does not require a share to produce somebody as soon as they're wristed what  what's the case was on docket mr ken's case was on the docket he was represented about public defender more client mr client had been appointed in january about on january moon two thousand thirteen mr client was there for the entire two weeks of the term judge coleman said a motion date for january rd i think that's the date scoopers just talking for representing him initially was appointed july was july two thousand and twelve how many so do these public defenders do do regular attorneys cycling in and out as public defenders generally your with judge coleman this is this is a discussion between a public defender and a judge and the sheriff has nothing to do with that discussion what the sheriff role and what it testified to clearly  to hear from the court on whether mr candidate mr kennedy if it was represented by counsel so he had a voice in that court and that's what that's what prompted the continuance and then again in april mr quiet recognized that they wait till the next term before they can be heard that's not what the record shows the record and evidence indicates that if counsel for example when mr kennedy didn't appear he's arrested he's over in jail on november nine he's in by his own testimony is trying to get in touch with counsel back and forth with efforts no there's no indication that he actually talked with but counsel has an opportunity if he wants judge coleman to hear a motion  and and those kind of motions or are common in the sense that if mr hannity and his counsel want to present something to the judge coleman about why he was not they are and why his bond should be reset that they're able to do that  google you just said with respect to the potential to transfer what his testimony was that in order for mr cannon to come before him after serious deal when you don't show up for trial and so in order for mr kennedy to come before him after he didn't show up for his trial and his bond was revoked essentially is that his counsel has to get a follow motion to get a hearing before him and he talked about that in his testimony share scott he does not talk about you know not being able to be in touch with counsel counsel will work with me i can't get counsel to sit here and i can't get i can't get before what he talks about his innocence and the problems that he's having or the concern coleman wanted him to do but the charges west point charges they were clay county charges sheriff scott and nothing to do with bringing the charges against mr candidate it was city of west point detective and that's what he in january docket nothing had been done in terms of getting kennedy before a judge coleman from november th to january twenty three by his counsel or anyone else and there was that time frame in his case on the docket in the to read somewhere in some later scenarios there were some additional continuances of two terms because of some additional investigation or some kind of  bail in the case so then voller was he the last lawyer he was the last one your honor in april what a missed client recognize the conflict he requested to withdraw as counsel that motion was granted your honor their clients are sitting there three minutes at a time i'm not familiar with it where that happens a lot i think what i would say to that based on what judge coleman's testimony was because he talked about having to deal with his o unusual circumstance situation in that regard for that reason as wales would share scott in this case he did as in judge cohen his  outside of term in the sheriff has authority and does set bond routinely this is a situation where bond was revoked for failing to show up at trial there share she got it according to judge coleman complied with willing to take him wherever he was requested to take the time mr canada's case it was considered in january twenty three we talked about that already weighed very briefly ball by ball it was a point in it and so on and so on that all of those points count so was there on behalf of mr kennedy in the room so he had representation albeit it not what he wanted  this matter is about the bench warrant that sheriff scott failed to act for so it to mr kennedy did not appear before the court october two thousand and twelve judge coleman directed her the bench warrant that cannady be brought before the court to answer to appear and to answer for his failure to appear sheriff scott's failure to act pursuant to the bench warrant was a that was duly found in his record that motion would have been heard would have been argued either by mr kennedy what's the evidence there that is in the record your honor dead he found that motion with what's the evidence that would have been hard when his lawyer been there your honor he was not there and he never appeared one day before jets colon to answer pursuant to the bit torrent the sheriff is not relieved of his statutory duties to act pursuant even to the be asked what i'm hearing is the sheriff said i'll take him over there where the lawyers and the judge tell me to the judge told him in the bench warrant to bend in your honor in that in the sheriff was waiting that died ringing if the judging and the lawyer said bring in the lawyers and don't bring him know the testimony is clear that at a minimum the sheriff is responding to his statutory duty is to act pursuant to the bench warrant had he been there a number of things could have taken place on it but he was never brought there with the testimony about what would have happened we're trial here we have trial mr kennedy testified at trial that he would have been able to protest his innocence had he been brought before the court on january rd two thousand and thirteen and that was what sheriff scott was directed to do and he failed to do that you failed to abide by his statutory duties and to detain mr kennedy for two hundred and sixty four days was a blatant disregard  against the county who is liable for mr corsair scott's actions because he is a final policy decision maker for clay county mississippi as the official responsible for detention and transport that is a statutory duty set out by mississippi code section one thousand and twenty five dash thirty five and based on his failure to act pursuant to that bench warrant it is our contention that he violated mr can it is due process rights to the th amendment and that that violation was not objective lee reasonable he is not entitled to qualified immunity in the lower court's decision suit respectfully be reverse