Opinion ID: 1792208
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Issue: Whether James' Summary Incarceration Prior to Trial Was Improper?

Text: On July 14, 1987, James filed an Application and Affidavit for Continuance. James requested a continuance because he had scheduled a doctor's appointment in Memphis, Tennessee, on July 20, 1987  the day before the trial was set to begin. More specifically, James explained that, as result of an auto accident which occurred several months earlier, he scheduled himself to undergo medical testing at a Memphis hospital; therefore, he would be unable to attend the trial on the date set. On July 17, Judge Carlson held a hearing on James' application. At the conclusion of the hearing, Judge Carlson rejected James' application. James appealed this decision and now contends that his so-called summary incarceration violated his constitutional and statutory rights. Disposition of this issue is unnecessary; whether the judge improperly incarcerated James has nothing to do with the merits of this case and, as a consequence, reversal is not a possible remedy. [4] This Court therefore rejects James' contention without prejudice. If James continues to feel aggrieved, he may opt to seek a remedy, if any, other than reversal of this case.