Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bond Reinstatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge reinstates $25,000 bond for Tannen Willis after contested withdrawal and bond-revocation hearing
Summary
After testimony and conflicting accounts about whether the defendant stayed in contact with his lawyer, the court granted a motion to reinstate bond for Tannen Willis, restoring a $25,000 bond and scheduling a final plea day and trial date.
A Cheatham County judge on a criminal docket hearing granted a motion to reinstate the bond for defendant Tannen Willis and restored the original $25,000 bond after a contested hearing over whether Willis had failed to stay in contact with his former attorney.
The hearing examined a prior docket entry that recorded a motion to withdraw by defense counsel S. S. Richards and an order that had revoked Willis' bond, noting “no contact with an attorney.” Willis and multiple witnesses told the court he had attempted to contact his lawyer and was present in court the day the withdrawal motion was heard. Public defender Mr. Vaughn testified he saw Willis in court that day and confirmed contact attempts. Richards’ motion to withdraw cited Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 1.16 and said communication had broken down.
The judge described the statutory purpose of bond — to ensure a defendant's appearance — and said the one-line docket entry stating the bond was revoked for lack of contact was “somewhat suspect” in light of testimony that Willis had attempted to contact his attorney. The court found the record did not clearly support continued revocation and ordered the prior $25,000 bond reinstated. The judge said party bonding (Pardue Bonding) could remain on the bond if that company agreed.
The judge also set a final plea day in July as the last opportunity to resolve the case by agreement and scheduled a trial date in mid‑July if no agreement is reached. The court confirmed counsel would represent the defendant going forward and instructed counsel and defense to proceed with discovery and preparation under the new schedule.
Observers in court discussed the practical effects: a bond reinstatement restores the defendant’s opportunity to be released under the former terms (if the bonding company remains), but the judge cautioned the defendant and counsel that the July final-plea schedule would be enforced and that trial would follow if the case was not resolved.
Ending The judge granted the motion to reinstate the bond and restored the original $25,000 bond amount; whether the same bonding company will remain is subject to the bonding company’s agreement. The court set a final plea day in July and a mid‑July trial date if the case is not resolved beforehand.
