Judge orders defendants to consult three attorneys or risk bond increase

At a county criminal docket, the presiding judge ordered multiple defendants who had made bond to consult with at least three attorneys and return in about 30 days with either a retained lawyer or the names of attorneys they had contacted. The judge warned that failure to follow that instruction could lead to a bond increase or other court action.

The instruction was applied at routine initial appearances and arraignments across several cases. The judge told Bonita Graham during her initial appearance that, because she had made bond, she needed “to try another 30 days at least” and to “talk to at least 3 others” and bring back the names if she could not hire counsel. The judge repeated the same requirement to multiple other defendants, including Tammy Ferrell, Sarah Henderson, Mikayla Marcantel, Jeremiah Paya, Dalton Fraget, and others.

Why it matters: defendants who appear after making bond are not automatically entitled to court-appointed counsel, so the judge used the reset period to require active efforts to secure representation. The judge stated repeatedly that bringing the names of attorneys contacted would document the defendant’s efforts; if defendants did not comply, the judge said she might “raise your bond for not following that court order,” which could result in remand to custody.

Details and examples: during the docket the judge instructed Tammy Ferrell that the court would have her fill out paperwork to see if she qualified for a court-appointed attorney because she reported she was not working. To Sarah Henderson the judge granted a normal ~30-day reset after Henderson said she had recently switched jobs and needed “maybe 2 more weeks” to pay for counsel; the judge reiterated that if Henderson could not hire counsel she should return with the names of the lawyers she had contacted. Jeremiah Paya said he had talked to attorneys but could not afford the fees; the judge ordered another 30-day reset and again required proof of contacts and a pay stub when he returned. For several defendants the judge combined the instruction with an order to “step in front of the clerk” to get the reset notice and, when appropriate, to fill out the indigency/court-appointed counsel paperwork.

Court’s stated rationale and limits: the judge explained that defendants who are in custody typically receive court-appointed counsel, but defendants who post bond are expected to make a demonstrable effort to hire private counsel while on bond. The judge repeatedly framed the three-attorney requirement as a minimum and said defendants could contact “10, however many” attorneys if needed to find an affordable option. The admonition was procedural: it required defendants either to retain counsel or to document their efforts; it did not automatically require appointment of counsel absent an indigency finding.

Process notes: the court combined the instruction with standard administrative steps: defendants were given reset dates (generally about 30 days), directed to obtain reset notices from the clerk, and in some cases directed to complete affidavits for court-appointed counsel if they reported inability to pay. The judge emphasized that the affidavit must be filled out accurately and sworn under oath.

Ending: Defendants who lacked funds were repeatedly told to return with proof of job status or the names of attorneys contacted. The judge warned that noncompliance could lead to bond reconsideration and to being ordered back into custody.