My cobloggers have blogged about this case, so I thought I’d point to today’s opinion reversing Maye’s conviction. I haven’t yet read the opinion, but the conclusion reads:
Finding that the trial court abused its discretion in not allowing Maye to exercise the constitutional right to be tried in the county where the offense occurred, the judgment of the trial court is reversed, and this case remanded for a new trial.
Thanks to InstaPundit for the pointer.
Kazinski says:
Congratulations to Orin who according to this is working pro bono on the case.
I’m not over optimistic about the retrial, it seems to me a coin flip, a dead cop is an awful lot for a jury to digest. I would hope that the prosecutor, in the interests of justice, and fear of losing, would offer a plea that would let Mays out with time served and probation.
November 17, 2009, 4:51 pmbear says:
Congrats to Radley Balko on his outstanding work bringing this matter to light. I was unaware the Prof Kerr has thrown his ProBono bonafides into the mix, but good for you Sir.
Yoeman’s work…both of you. And thank you for your contributions to Corey’s grave injustice.
-bear
November 17, 2009, 5:16 pmProfessor Chaos says:
Wonderful, wonderful news. Here’s hoping that competent counsel — and lots of them — can make a difference in the new trial. It’s still an uphill battle. As Kazinski said so well, a dead cop is an awful lot for a jury to digest. (I’d like to believe that some kind of deal could be worked out, but I tend to believe that won’t happen.)
November 17, 2009, 5:34 pmDavid Schwartz says:
What strange grounds the court picked to reverse the conviction! Isn’t it obvious that court didn’t return the trial to Jefferson County for the same reason it removed the trial from Jefferson County in the first place? With so much substance, it seems odd to me that the court latched onto a bit of fluff.
November 17, 2009, 5:38 pmAnderson says:
The reversal was a bit odd, and it’s possible the State could take this up on cert to the Miss. S. Ct.
I hope not, though. I’d like to see Maye get a competent trial, and with the attention he’s gotten, he will.
November 17, 2009, 5:46 pmbear says:
Dead cop busting down doors he shouldn’t have been bustin’ down not-with-standing, it is indeed a tough sell. I think it’s even been well established that the officer was an honest and good man and LEO but, I too hope Kazinski above is right. As to the fluff bit, many have thought that the quack and discredited charlatan used to provide a nail in Corey’s coffin is far to big a can of worms for the entire state to have to deal with. I mean apparently they’re still using that guy’s services.
They’ll throw the citizens a bone or two like this…but really doing root-cause analysis on the pieces of garbage whose perjury you subborn or whose whole cloth inventions of fact you conspire to bring to light is a bit much…even for the most ardent of justice seeking courts.
Just thinking out loud here…
-bear
November 17, 2009, 5:49 pmKazinski says:
The reversal isn’t odd at all, if you read the decission it cites a specific right in the Mississippi constitution:
Mayes first asked for a change of venue from Jefferson Davis County, the judge then moved the trial to Lamar county. When Mayes evidently didn’t like that choice and requested the trial be moved back to Jeff Davis again, the Judge picked a 3rd county, Marion. The Judge probably could have left the trial in Lamar county, but he couldn’t arbitrarily pick a 3rd county.
November 17, 2009, 6:30 pmCrunchy Frog says:
Jefferson Davis County. Is The South (TM) ever going to graduate from the 19th Century?
November 17, 2009, 6:39 pmOff Kilter says:
Gee, Crunchy Frog, is Hamilton County, OH, in the South? Or all of the many Washington counties? Is it the 19th century you want the South to graduate from, or merely the Confederacy?
November 17, 2009, 6:59 pmKazinski says:
I happen to live in King County Washington. In 1852 King County was named after William King, a Democrat, virulent racist, and ardent defender of slavery. A few years back the county, decided to revise history and rededicate the county to Martin Luther King, and not have to change the stationary. So for the first 152 years of its existence we honored a proud slave owner, the last 4 a civil rights leader, I don’t think it’s made any difference at all.
November 17, 2009, 6:59 pmCrunchy Frog says:
I wonder how many King County residents a) know the history behind the name, and b) are bothered by it.
I’m bothered that I live in Los Angeles County, but that’s because of the idiots in charge, not the name itself.
November 17, 2009, 8:16 pmProsecutorial Indiscretion says:
I happen to live in King County Washington. In 1852 King County was named after William King, a Democrat, virulent racist, and ardent defender of slavery. A few years back the county, decided to revise history and rededicate the county to Martin Luther King, and not have to change the stationary. So for the first 152 years of its existence we honored a proud slave owner, the last 4 a civil rights leader, I don’t think it’s made any difference at all.
Wow, that’s kind of awesome.
November 17, 2009, 8:17 pmBob from Ohio says:
Didn’t the judge treat it as a second motion for change of venue? Mayes already convinced the court that Davis County was bad, why should the Court send it back there. Mayes didn’t like Lamar either. A 3rd county was the right choice.
Doesn’t matter, he’ll just be convicted on remand.
November 17, 2009, 9:24 pmOrin Kerr says:
I couldn’t be more delighted: This is truly wonderful news. Although for the record, I worked on the case when it was in the trial court during the post conviction motions (leading up to and including when the death sentence was vacated in 2006) but I did not work on the appeal.
November 17, 2009, 9:26 pmArthurKirkland says:
This case vividly illustrates the stupidity of a system that sends police officers to break down residential doors in the middle of the night, chasing doobies on the basis of a flawed tip in a system that requires little accountability from tipsters, warrant-issuing judges, police officers or prosecutors. Dead police officers are a foreseeable consequence of such a system — and I see no reason police officers should get special benefit of the doubt when engaged in paramilitary-style assaults on residences. A homeowner is entitled to defend himself.
The likelihood that a Mississippi jury would reach a just verdict (other than by accident) in a case such as Mr. Maye’s appears to approximate the likelihood that Carrie Prejean will someday replace William Jefferson as leader of the Harvard Department of Physics. I hope Prof. Kerr and his colleagues are able to introduce some reason and justice to the situation.
November 17, 2009, 9:30 pmKazinski says:
ArthurKirkland:
I don’t know where to start with that. Maybe I’ll work backward, IIRC William Jefferson just got sentenced to 13 years in prison for conducting a physics experiment involving 90,000 in cash in his freezer. I suppose Carrie Prejean’s chances of becoming the physics chair are about the same as the rest of us, and thirdly, what do you know about Mississippi juries? Jefferson Davis county has a Black sherrif, has a substantial Black majority of almost 60%. Or don’t you think Blacks make fair jurors?
November 18, 2009, 12:15 amArthurKirkland says:
I was thinking at least as much about lack of education and sophistication as about race, but I am as confident that jury composition is more important than population composition in this context as I am willing to wager that Mr. Maye’s jury was more white than black.
What kind of jury would buy the prosecution’s story (innocent guy — without a criminal record, without the huge dope stash the police claim to be pursuing, with a child in the apartment — sees police outside, decides to emulate Custer, shoots one officer, then lets the others arrest him). The kind of jury that swallows the police statements reflexively, is overwhelmed by rage with respect to a good-old-boy police officer’s death, and adds at least a dash of racism. And gets to decide because because the local prosecutor was willing to bring such a case, in part because he could rely on getting a less-than-brilliant jury.
In other words, a backwater Mississippi jury.
When Prejean succeeds Jefferson, I will gladly reconsider.
November 18, 2009, 12:46 amKazinski says:
Mississippians of both races are I’m sure much more conservative when it comes to law and order than in more supposedly more sophisticated areas. But at least in terms of racial makeup, Jefferson Davis county is 58% black, compared to Marion County’s 33%, where the original trial took place. I don’t doubt having a larger percentage of Blacks in the jury pool will help him, but I also think that there will be a lot of “bitter clingers” among the white population that will be favorable to a gun rights, self protection argument. What I think is most critical is impeaching the testimony of the the informant that testified that someone in Mayes’ duplex was holding the crack cocaine that the informant purchased from next door the previous day. I don’t think many juries white or black are going to be sympathetic to crack dealers. I think that is the biggest hurdle for the defense, and the inhabitants of the next door unit may have the most critical testimony in impeaching the informant.
I agree with you that Prejean’s chances are about the same as yours in becoming the next chair of the Harvard Physics department, but I wouldn’t take your predjudice against young good looking sexually active women too far
November 18, 2009, 2:13 amRicardo says:
According to Radley Balko, two of the original jurors were black women. He doesn’t mention what the other ten were. In any case, Balko’s interview with one of the jurors is eye-opening, to say the least. If the jury system is supposed to be the guardian of liberty, boy are we in trouble.
November 18, 2009, 3:07 amNickM says:
On reading Balko’s interview report, my immediate reaction is that it sounds like the juror has a serious meth addiction. If so, nothing she says now can be taken as meaningful about the trial.
Nick
November 18, 2009, 4:08 amAnderson says:
The reversal isn’t odd at all, if you read the decision it cites a specific right in the Mississippi constitution:
What’s odd is that the COA is unusually solicitous of a convict’s rights. Our courts are not famous for that.
Also, while the majority does explain why Maye didn’t waive his right, there is something a bit odd about begging to get your venue moved, and then begging to go right back where you couldn’t get a fair trial.
November 18, 2009, 8:12 amU.Va. Grad says:
Worth noting Radley Balko’s comment on the makeup of the jury (and the effect of a transfer back to Jefferson Davis County):
November 18, 2009, 10:19 amAnderson says:
The odd thing is why they wanted to move the case in the first place. Like whites in other counties are more sympathetic to black guys who shoot white cops?
Given Balko’s remarks, the initial move, while not Strickland-level, looks, um, imprudent.
November 18, 2009, 10:37 amBen Vernia says:
I argued the venue issue for Cory in the Court of Appeals. To recap, Cory initially moved to have the case transferred from Jefferson Davis County, and the Court granted this motion. Several months later, and two months before trial, he moved to have the case transferred back to the vicinage county. The trial judge, Judge Eubanks, wrote that he was granting the motion, but, without conducting a hearing on the suitability of Jefferson Davis County, transferred the case to a third county (which no one had asked for). At a post-trial hearing, Judge Eubanks stated that he lacked authority to return the case.
I don’t see anything “a bit odd” (@ Anderson) about a defendant’s timely reassessment of whether or not to exercise a fundamental constitutional right. If the decision is not simply a last-minute gambit (and in Cory’s case, he moved to transfer the case back two months before his scheduled trial date), I also don’t think the reason for that decision should be second-guessed or speculated about by a trial judge.
The Court of Appeals also noted that Judge Eubanks, the trial judge, had offered no reason for transferring the case to the third county:
In Mississippi, it’s well-established that a court must exercise “sound discretion” in ruling on venue motions. I’m disappointed that we did not prevail on the other issues, but the Court’s ruling on venue is well-reasoned.
November 18, 2009, 10:48 amAnderson says:
I appreciate Mr. Vernia’s comment, and admire his advocacy for Mr. Maye (a man who, on the facts as I have them, ought never to have been convicted).
I merely meant that, to a lawyer like myself unfamiliar with criminal procedure, there is something rather odd in representing to the court that one cannot get a fair trial in County X, then coming back later to exercise one’s right to a trial in County, without (judging from the opinion) explaining how one had originally been mistaken. The dissenting opinion by Judge Maxwell is not an implausible one on its face, though perhaps the ability to withdraw a waiver of a constitutional right trumps the dissent’s considerations.
The success of Mr. Vernia and his colleagues in overcoming this knee-jerk “common sense” reaction, at least as to a majority of the court of appeals, is to be commended. Congratulations!
November 18, 2009, 11:02 amBen Vernia says:
Anderson, thanks for the compliments.
Venue decisions for defense counsel sometimes (perhaps usually) come down to a small number of bad options. On top of that, the passage of time changes the variables (press coverage dies down, perhaps new facts come out that put the case in a different light publicly, etc.).
In Cory’s case, his trial counsel’s motion was based in part on a telephone call she had received from another attorney in Lamar County (to where the trial had been moved), who told her that Cory could not impanel a fair jury there.
November 18, 2009, 11:20 amRyan Waxx says:
For people who are guilty of the crime they are charged with, “a small number of bad options” is the norm.
It’s quite revealing that none of the discussion here revolves around evidence, and all about getting the “right” people to hear it.
Goodness, we must have so many of the “wrong” people in America, if you must search through county after county after county to find a fair trial. All those bigots, hating on your client… yeah, that must be it. Couldn’t have anything to do with guilt or innocence, it all has to do with too many of those ig’nant white folks on the jury.
November 19, 2009, 3:57 pmBen Vernia says:
Well, Ryan, it might be that the discussion here has concerned the venue issue because that was the basis of the Court of Appeals’ ruling. As one of Cory’s lawyers, I’m more than happy to address the evidence back in court, since I think the evidence overwhelmingly supports Cory’s testimony.
November 23, 2009, 1:20 pmA Lowe says:
Cory Maye should be freed. It sounds like the officers did not get the proper warrant to search his side of the duplex.
He did not hear the police identify themselves; so he just defended himself. I wonder why they even need another trial to right this injustice. This was just an unfortunate mistake on the part of the police department.
The state should pay him for his unlawful detainment.
January 17, 2010, 4:14 amChloe Anderson says:
Carrie Prejean deserves to have her crown. She is beauiful and is also entitled to her own opinion about gays. ‘;
April 29, 2010, 9:06 am