IN THE ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
EX PARTE MAC BAILEY MARQUETTE )
)
In re: )
STATE OF ALABAMA, )
Respondent, ) CR-2025-____
)
v. )
)
MAC BAILEY MARQUETTE, )
Petitioner-Defendant. )
PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR THIS COURT TO ORDER THE
MORGAN CIRCUIT COURT TO STAY ALL MATTERS PENDING
RESOLUTION OF MAC BAILEY MARQUETTE’S PETITION FOR
A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Mac Bailey Marquette respectfully requests that this Honorable Court
order the Morgan Circuit Court to stay all proceedings in this matter
pending resolution of the present petition for a writ of mandamus.
1. This same day Marquette petitions this Court to issue a writ of
mandamus ordering Hon. Charles Elliott to recuse from this matter.
A hearing on Marquette’s request for immunity pursuant to § 13A-3-
23(d), Ala. Code 1975, is currently set for March 25, 2025.
1
2. At the heart of Marquette’s recusal request lies allegations that
(1) Judge Elliott has pre-determined without the benefit of an
evidentiary hearing that he will deny Marquette’s immunity request
because of extra judicial concerns; (2) Judge Elliott told Lt. Mike
Burleson of the City of Decatur Police Department of this intention
and these extra-judicial concerns; (3) Burleson recounted this
conversation that was witnessed or overheard by another who told
then Marquette about the conversation; and (4) upon Marquette filing
a motion for recusal and request for an evidentiary hearing, Judge
Elliott then violated the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics by (a)
carrying out a series of ex parte conversations concerning the recusal
motion that were improper, and (b) denying Marquette his Due
Process right to present his claim in court with proper subpoena power
to prove his allegations.
3. A stay is necessary to ensure that these critical concerns are
considered and ruled upon by this Court prior to the circuit court
holding a hearing on the immunity request.
4. This same day Marquette will be filing a stay request with the
circuit court.
2
5. Marquette does not file this stay request for the purpose of
disrupting the orderly administration of justice in this Court or in the
circuit court. Rather, Marquette asks that this crucial Due Process
issue be resolved before the circuit court is to hold a critical hearing to
determine Marquette’s immunity under § 13A-3-23(d).
Respectfully submitted on March 7, 2025.
/s J.D. Lloyd /s Brett M. Bloomston
J.D. Lloyd Brett M. Bloomston
The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd The Bloomston Firm
2320 Arington Ave. S. 1914 Fourth Ave. N., Ste 100
Birmingham, AL 35205 Birmingham, AL 35203
(205) 538-3340 205-212-9700
JDLloyd@JDLloydLaw.com Brett@thebloomstonfirm.com
/s Elizabeth A. Young
Elizabeth A. Young
Dummier Young LLC
1400 21st Way S.
Birmingham, AL 35205
205-631-8004
Counsel for Petitioner lyoung@dummieryoung.com
3
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
I certify that this brief contains 321 words and is written in 14-point
Century Schoolbook in compliance with the requirements and limitations
of Rule 27(d) and Rule 32(b)(5), Ala. R. App. P.
/s J.D. Lloyd
J.D. Lloyd
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have served the foregoing on the State of
Alabama via email at the address below on March 7, 2025.
docketroom@AlabamaAG.gov
/s J.D. Lloyd
J.D. Lloyd
