[{"_1":2,"_121":-5,"_122":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6171893,"mediaKeyId","5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3","parentId",5393349,"title","Multiple negotiated pleas resolved on July 14 calendar; sentences range from probation to fines and restitution","audioSeconds",1799,"startMs",1477000,"endMs",3276000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3&start=1477&end=3276","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3/thumbnail_1477000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6171893/Texas/Multiple-negotiated-pleas-resolved-on-July-14-calendar-sentences-range-from-probation-to-fines-and-restitution","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6171893-977db927209983b48c186ab8407e3c3c/orig.mp4?Expires=1774871641&Signature=c~z2pDqATGYM2xGS~phFAe7bn6zkLNWmD9zu8w8Fo1EzGtnjkrjaRjLzhoNgLaOIoZATgPeUjw4Zz3BZ5GbDnjyMK75urPgxVaed6yrYDcoyoRY9lRgwTr0V8XDp9Qg6Pb1hm5ftEpEHcvkSiLZrqEWC6AqN0RummYbjaJsIrtlx4tgz4qErsXXbpw75KYHwibbBEQc-lx201XNlPKNNnZm454az8MjIEsCNlpldReXtS-ViNl7gsxrqZ84OG8QXn8rmdMKa-jkEX81MKuc4Pm8UgCQOQ1BonuHKz5TwYf-mEYgD9XdRIRzODajB4S3XE0a2vgolSy~8qDQGHaWp5g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-07-15T06:17:41Z","article","Clayton County State Court accepted a number of negotiated pleas during the July 14 calendar call, resolving cases with sentences that included probation, fines, treatment requirements and restitution.

Notable dispositions recorded on the calendar:
- Daphne Tiandra Scavella pleaded nolo contendere to criminal trespass (count 1); the court accepted a negotiated recommendation of 12 months with two days to serve, credit for time served, balance probated, anger‑management treatment and no contact with the identified co‑party; count 2 (obstruction) was recommended for nolle prosequi.
- John Robert Lewis Jr. pleaded nolo contendere to theft of services; the court ordered 12 months pay‑only probation and restitution of $741.84 to Precision Auto Tune, with probation terminating upon payment of restitution.
- Carl Scott Jr. entered a guilty plea to a family‑violence battery count under the First Offender Act; the court imposed 12 months probation, a family‑violence intervention program (24 weeks) and a $300 fine (total with surcharges reported at $444). The court explained special conditions and intake procedures for probation.
- Marissa Jane Thomas pleaded guilty to a speeding offense (100 mph in a 65‑mph zone). The state recommended an $800 fine; the court placed her on 12 months pay‑only probation and warned surcharges would increase the total amount owed.
- William Nelson Fisher Jr. pleaded no contest to reckless driving following a single‑vehicle accident; the court set a fine with surcharges totaling $1,420 and offered up to 90 days to pay; the court also described an option for pay‑only probation and intake with probation staff.

Prosecutors read factual bases for each plea on the record and defense counsel told the court which disposition each client would accept. The judge repeatedly emphasized reporting requirements for probation and cautioned that the quickest route back to court is failing to report to probation or missing required conditions.

Each defendant who entered a negotiated plea was placed in a breakout room with probation staff after the plea to complete intake or ask questions about reporting and conditions.

Speakers included presiding Judge Tammy Long Hayward; prosecutors who recited factual bases; and defense attorneys including MJ Tortorello, Owen Lynch and others who announced readiness or entry of plea.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Clayton State 304's Personal Meeting Room","oneSentenceSummary","During the July 14 calendar the court accepted several negotiated pleas and entered sentences including probation, community service, fines and restitution; notable dispositions included pleas in domestic violence, theft of services and traffic matters.","taxTitle","Clayton County State Court 304, Texas Courts, Judicial, Texas","taxId",66308,"location","Texas","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6171898,"Court hears red‑light and school‑bus appeal calendar; judge notes $1,000 statutory fine for passing school bus",761,11947000,12708000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3&start=11947&end=12708","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3/thumbnail_11947000.jpg","/articles/6171898/Texas/Court-hears-redlight-and-schoolbus-appeal-calendar-judge-notes-1000-statutory-fine-for-passing-school-bus","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6171898-35fa32bf69666435643f96fbd1ae2fb2/orig.mp4?Expires=1774871641&Signature=ByQOjOzWBcscQSRXxc61mv~Su0HIbADjMYBUZyo1Zd32-WVGuM-XZfz8ZmeL8oV0o40mPTiFfq6v8rTfQQLkHsZ2k3U7xD4wqHvT4YC-QJx3c~RFLFGDEsGsAdDoW5uMwwW8qXGopdlFFbr5nP7TmHF7CZrndGIrhCkqf9~jwWxP5T3XxdPrB~pcX6Y2irUrev4-7MUlIDrG-5lHG8wDOwGXTxt3Y0sWSv9SCtxgjoDsuvpqNXmwdCocXzLP7QwlY-pQs4Ft0iiBdSzMw8Z43qgmrgsWi6xpkSkcIAqVTHEeTaw50f8k6ptpjPUP7Ok8b2PjKywOZ4iq4TFUkqQhxw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Clayton County State Court handled a civil calendar of red‑light and school‑bus crossing appeals on July 14, granting several appeals, denying at least one and reminding motorists that state law now imposes a $1,000 fine for passing a stopped school bus.

The court explained that recent state law changes make the penalty for passing a stopped school bus an automatic $1,000 fine; the judge said she has no discretion to reduce that statutory amount and can only provide time to pay. Several appellants produced affidavits or identified a different driver; the court granted appeals for Derek Lashun Alston (affidavit provided), Jamia Ewing, Desiree Keyes and Sandra Smith (the ticket had been issued to a driver other than the named recipient). The court denied the appeal for Shamique Smith after no one appeared to support that challenge.

One appellant, Ibrahim Abdul Hashem, told the court he is on Social Security and asked for extra time; the court offered up to 90 days for payment and asked counsel to capture his email so the court could provide an order with the payment schedule. Another appellant, Yolanda Yvette Gallimore, requested a hearing; the court viewed video evidence in open court, heard Gallimore explain she believed she had time to pass when yellow lights were flashing, and denied the appeal but offered a 90‑day status calendar for payments given her financial circumstances.

Assistant Solicitor General (ASG) Tipton handled video reviews and coordinated with the courtroom for people who were present. The judge asked appellants who wanted an order emailed to provide an address to tipton through the chat. The courtroom recorded several granted appeals and at least one denial on the record.

Speakers included the presiding judge, ASG Tipton, court staff and multiple appellants and their representatives.","On the civil red‑light and crossing‑guard calendar the judge granted several appeals, denied others and reminded drivers that state law now sets a $1,000 fine for passing a stopped school bus.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6171903,"Judge tells Zoom participants to show full names or face bench‑warrant warnings",798,70000,868000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3&start=70&end=868","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3/thumbnail_70000.jpg","/articles/6171903/Texas/Judge-tells-Zoom-participants-to-show-full-names-or-face-benchwarrant-warnings","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6171903-cca5de77bf8920d631abbf55984efec8/orig.mp4?Expires=1774871641&Signature=bKeux6ACLHzvyQ5jQnZYTHsQ9AL5AyT37y34U6E5oEqJA01DZ83y1m5Thnverlm5dHE8d8bbVbuYwVeMRuxcGYKp~-m1O-Q5TiBAJPXxkBKpX3Vg4T8I40zkLUTBVBopE08iYYwV-A6ZmiHgn1vMTFBnqQZ6i8TP-zXzXw2iF-qnnvJfCpTzKsGpefX7AQ6U38~30F3ZtHGDzzdl0-xfBwK2KMNzljlBZb1t~O8hsl59HOVHlL5OlbHewajt7DAh7~JTh6MBsGADkZG27-NvAO4Gn39UgzfkqG-avxjfFjStQ7RDEffkEf2JeMAcWi866tLzkM0f09JjoFYKvOY~hw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The court opened the July 14 internal calendar call by requiring remote participants to show their full first and last names in Zoom and by warning that failure to unmute when called could prompt bench‑warrant proceedings.

Judge Tammy Long Hayward said at the start of the session, “There are quite a few people on today's calendar, so it would be very, very helpful if your first and last name are on the screen. ... If I call your name and you're not able to unmute, then both of you will get a bench warrant because you're not effectively in court.” She instructed participants to use Zoom’s rename function and suggested watching a short how‑to video if they did not know how to rename themselves.

Throughout the calendar call, the judge repeatedly reminded participants that clients who have announced ready must appear in person at court on the trial date and that the court does not conduct jury trials by video. The judge also advised remote counsel on practical steps — for example, delivering clothing to the jail in advance to prepare an incarcerated defendant for court — and said that attorneys should use the chat function to provide contact information for scheduling evidence review appointments.

Court staff and attorneys used the calendar procedures, breakout rooms, and chat to coordinate pretrial conferences, video viewings and probation intake. The judge told participants she would reconvene for subsequent calendars on schedule and asked remote participants to remain muted unless called.

The reminders were given at multiple points in the call, including at the opening and again before the 11 a.m. calendar, reflecting the court's ongoing effort to manage a hybrid virtual/in‑person docket efficiently.","At the start of the July 14 virtual calendar call, Judge Tammy Long Hayward instructed remote participants to display their full first and last names on Zoom and warned that failure to unmute when called could result in a bench warrant.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6171908,"Judge grants transfer to superior court after 131 days in custody; defense objects",3007,753000,3760000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3&start=753&end=3760","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3/thumbnail_753000.jpg","/articles/6171908/Texas/Judge-grants-transfer-to-superior-court-after-131-days-in-custody-defense-objects","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6171908-8accb136cdf842651f6f59fff956de72/orig.mp4?Expires=1774871641&Signature=bQWgyoYp3KK9-kmMzgTgEiGxkuHqMCv31X96w9sGU7qIZpatHtTTn2hVcsAAcfJqGw3wWiWPr2EqtxIlO6Y1jyA7R9Lc6Rxmc1v8EW3ekiWVq6y2Z0Q-tcCcnydqNxxKTm4eR2l9URVClh~MRmHM-9mjDq1xzLERd4PqPNe82teMo01Y6OK8T1Sc5BoONKrEyuprfxsslmUtndZrMgPzXLmOEn7ZedXP2bP3EFrboYAVPsxFr1a1tkIJvxN4o76gLODVcYKGbnkFF1cAaKKd9U0oeve9WGMDgO6aVtwB7YOFM2mnbeQgDkSDr~zJucWirpUmu16a2~JqoI~k4NT4mg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Judge Tammy Long Hayward ordered that a defendant who had been in custody about 131 days be transferred to superior court and said she would sign the transfer despite defense objection.

Defense attorney MJ Tortorello told the court her client had been incarcerated 131 days and asked for an opportunity to be heard; she argued that moving the matter now, on the eve of trial, raised due‑process concerns. The judge said she understood the defense’s concern about the length of pretrial custody but signed the transfer, stating she did not want the case to be bounced back and forth between jurisdictions and that the court had given direction to the district attorney’s office to receive the paperwork electronically.

Prosecutors told the court the case had been bound over from magistrate court; Assistant District Attorney (ADA) Williams and Deputy Chief Jamal Williams participated in parts of the exchange. The court acknowledged the procedural complexity: two codefendants were already in superior court and the state said it intended to proceed against all three together.

The transcript records the court asking for clarification on why the defendant was held without bond; the defense later noted a prior sentence and that a 17 10 1 bond denial based on probation or parole status existed in the file. The court accepted the explanation that prior probation/parole matters affected bond and noted that the primary concern was the amount of time the defendant had already spent in custody.

After hearing arguments, Judge Hayward signed the transfer order “over the defense’s objection” and asked ADA Williams to confirm when the superior court paperwork would be transmitted; ADA Williams said she would send the documents electronically that day.

The defendant in this exchange was identified in the transcript as being incarcerated since March and associated with a multi‑defendant investigation involving alleged cargo theft; the court instructed the parties to avoid returning the matter to state‑court jurisdiction unless necessary.

Speakers included Judge Tammy Long Hayward; defense counsel MJ Tortorello; ADA Williams (who requested time to coordinate with the district attorney's office); Deputy Chief Jamal Williams (who was on Zoom); and counsel for the defendant.","A defendant held about 131 days without bond will be transferred to superior court over the defense's objection; defense argued due‑process concerns and requested a hearing.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":91,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":94,"_51":117,"_53":118,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":119,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":120,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6171913,"Judge refuses attorney withdrawal; counsel ordered to remain on defendant's case",2262,2332000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5393349-e23c297a06170e587676133da704a1f3&start=70&end=2332","/articles/6171913/Texas/Judge-refuses-attorney-withdrawal-counsel-ordered-to-remain-on-defendants-case","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6171913-98be72a8076f6482a51738d9c256f74e/orig.mp4?Expires=1774871641&Signature=TY2PtR3zOa5etDe7AOfwSABAs0zOMvtS0gvU1y2xt7jsziKUCe-UIg7m6eASSaO~S3QfGk2O2jp653pMnd3Lx8p~~xCob~i-gwpjpmbdHwxa8iHaI2~5ayaBEtJeg8a6Gudu1H~8izM6s6qFKe2mAXX5XBiCe~AASFfiNOm2MKd6oetCX9lou-HmUJkCgSodQgYZi8xRbCNnBLfFuSrNvpKC009EE2rV5R8b-Rie35D-vi6k3ziDYV6YkxX3VIB3ZRmJq4P37DaM5zfqEe60ewQ5fjGndf42Yi3I8L9SIcHmdqe11rwdasTnuFy2hpJ1Q1VRkB4H2KvU4mIBLkH4WA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Judge Tammy Long Hayward declined to sign a motion to withdraw counsel in the matter involving Eric Barnett during the court's July 14 internal calendar call, and ordered the attorney of record to remain on the case.

The judge told the attorneys she would not allow the withdrawal, saying, “I'm not allowing you off this case. You took the case knowing you were gonna represent somebody.” She added she would not “go to the bar” over the matter and that the attorney remained the attorney of record for the upcoming trial.

Courtroom discussion showed the motion to withdraw was filed earlier that morning. An attorney who identified herself as “of counsel” to Chacole Rogers Law Firm said she filed paperwork after an in‑firm agreement terminated; she told the court, “I was required…that’s why I filed it.” The court replied that the filing did not by itself remove counsel and that any withdrawal requires the judge's approval.

The judge instructed the defense team and the clerk that the case remains set for trial preparations and that the attorney who has entered an appearance must be present. The court also advised defense counsel how to handle client logistics: if clothing is needed for the defendant at the jail, deliver it to the jail so deputies can prepare the defendant for court.

No formal substitution of counsel was signed on the record during the call. The court repeatedly emphasized it would not permit last‑minute withdrawals without its approval and warned that an appearance on the calendar creates continuing obligations in that case.

The ruling applies specifically to the withdrawal filing addressed in the July 14 calendar call; the judge did not rule on other unrelated motions or filings in pending matters.

Courtroom speakers who participated directly in this exchange included Judge Tammy Long Hayward; Zakia Watson Cafe, who announced readiness for trial on behalf of part of the defense team; Attorney Ross (representing the law firm that raised the issue); and an attorney identified in the record as “Of Counsel” to Chacole Rogers Law Firm who explained why the withdrawal document had been filed.

The court scheduled the defendant to appear for trial‑calendar business on the next Monday at 9 a.m. and told counsel to make jury and pretrial preparations accordingly.","On the July 14 internal calendar call, Judge Tammy Long Hayward declined to sign a motion to withdraw counsel in a case involving Eric Barnett, saying she would not permit the attorney to leave and instructing the firm to keep trial preparations on track.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Multiple negotiated pleas resolved on July 14 calendar; sentences range from probation to fines and restitution

Court hears red‑light and school‑bus appeal calendar; judge notes $1,000 statutory fine for passing school bus

Judge tells Zoom participants to show full names or face bench‑warrant warnings

Judge grants transfer to superior court after 131 days in custody; defense objects

Judge refuses attorney withdrawal; counsel ordered to remain on defendant's case