Supreme Court Reviews Propriety Of Conducting Late-Night Court Sessions During Trials

Thursday, November 9, 2017

In a case involving questions about jury deliberations that continued into the early morning hours, the Tennessee Supreme Court determined that the defense did not adequately object to the late-night session to appeal and that the issue cannot be reviewed under the plain error doctrine. The Court clarified that the correct standard of review in a case calling into question a judge’s decision to allow a jury to deliberate into the late night hours is abuse of discretion.

In the case, the defendant, Susan Jo Walls, was convicted of murdering her husband via a murder-for-hire scheme as well as conspiracy to commit murder. She received concurrent sentences of life in prison plus twenty-one years, respectively.  The issue in this case arose when, during the afternoon of the fourth day of trial, immediately after closing arguments, the defendant began experiencing high blood pressure, was attended by a paramedic, and transported to a hospital.  The recess lasted from 4:04 p.m. until 6:30 p.m., during which there was a brief discussion among the lawyers and judge about whether the case should continue to jury instructions if the defendant returned, or if they should recess for the day.  When the defendant returned to court, the trial judge resumed the proceedings by instructing the jury on the applicable law.  Jury deliberations began at 7:13 p.m.  The jury sent a question to the trial court at 10:41 p.m.  A short time later, they requested that pizza be delivered because they were hungry.  The jurors resumed deliberations at 11:13 p.m. and returned the guilty verdicts at 1:05 a.m. the following morning. 

The defendant appealed her convictions and sentences to the Court of Criminal Appeals, arguing, inter alia, that the trial court erred by allowing the jury to deliberate late into the night and into the early morning hours of the following day.  The Court of Criminal Appeals overturned the convictions on the basis that prior precedent required ”unusual and compelling circumstances” before late-night sessions could be conducted and that such circumstances were absent from this case. 

The Supreme Court granted the State’s application for permission to appeal the appellate court’s reversal of the defendant’s convictions.  The Court reversed the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals and concluded that defense counsel waived appellate review of this matter by failing to contemporaneously object to the late-night deliberations.  The Court concluded that the informal discussion that took place in the late afternoon was not a formal objection and that the defense had multiple opportunities—including when the defendant returned to court, when the jury instructions were read, when the jury asked a question, and when the jury asked for dinner—to object and remained silent on the issue of continuing deliberations.

The Supreme Court also decided that the issue could not be reviewed under the “plain error” rule because one of the five requisite factors had not been met.  Plain error review requires that there is a clear and unequivocal rule on the issue that the trial court did not follow. In this instance, there is no clear rule in Tennessee on how long judges should allow juries to deliberate.

To provide direction on this issue to attorneys and judges, a majority of the Court determined the appropriate standard of review for future cases involving late-night jury deliberations is abuse of discretion.

Justice Sharon G. Lee filed a separate opinion in which she agreed that the defendant was not entitled to relief. She dissented from the Court’s decision to proceed further and issue an advisory opinion regarding the appellate standard of review regarding late-night court proceedings. According to Justice Lee, the Court overreached and violated conservative prohibitions on issuing advisory opinions.

To read the majority opinion in State of Tennessee v. Susan Jo Walls authored by Justice Roger A. Page and the concurring opinion authored by Justice Sharon G. Lee, go to the opinions section of

Alexander: New Mercury Treatment Facility In Oak Ridge Will Mean “Safer, Cleaner Water”

Senator Lamar Alexander Monday spoke at the groundbreaking of a new water treatment facility at Y-12, “Outfall 200,” which supporters say will help reduce the amount of mercury getting into Tennessee waterways to safe levels and make it possible for cleanup work to begin at Y-12. “In May 2013, I came to Oak Ridge to announce that a new water treatment facility would be built ... (click for more)

Tyson Foods To Create 1,500 New Jobs In Humboldt

Tyson Food, Inc. officials announced Monday that the company will locate new operations in Gibson County.   Food processor, Tyson Foods, will create more than 1,500 jobs and invest over $300 million in Humboldt, which represents Tyson’s biggest investment in Tennessee and the single largest investment in Gibson County’s history.  “I want to thank Tyson Foods ... (click for more)

Former Executive Assistant To Pilot Sales Director Recalls Being Interviewed By FBI While Nursing Her Baby On The Front Porch

The executive assistant to the vice president of sales at Pilot Flying J told a Chattanooga jury on Monday that she never expected to be interviewed by the FBI on the front porch of her Knoxville home, nursing a one-month-old and with her other two young children running around in the yard. Katy Bibee, who worked directly for an expected star witness for the prosecution, said ... (click for more)

Tony Williams, 26, Shot On Dodson Avenue Late Sunday Night

Tony Williams, 26, was shot late Sunday night on Dodson Avenue. Chattanooga Police responded at 11:50 p.m.,  to the 900 block of Dodson Avenue on a shooting.   Upon arrival, police located the victim who was suffering from a non-life threatening gunshot wound. HCEMS responded and transported the victim to a nearby hospital. The victim advised police that the ... (click for more)

Pollution For Profit?

Why should Chattanooga allow special interests to boost sediment pollution in our South Chickamauga Creek? To pad their profit margin and pass that cost on to city taxpayers? If your city council votes to reduce the storm water regulations – that is the result we can expect. Special interest homebuilders profit, but citizens pay.  More sediment pollution and paid for with ... (click for more)

Roy Exum: Two From Sandy

Down through the years I have delighted in sharing stories that come from my friend Sandy Pohfal in Texas. Seeing how Thanksgiving is almost here – day after tomorrow – I figure it’s about time to slow down and let warmth of this week prepare us to give thanks for both the good and bad – without the bad things we wouldn’t recognize the real blessings. The first story I am going ... (click for more)