MIAMI (Court TV) — A displeased judge scolded attorneys in court on Wednesday, saying she may be forced to babysit future depositions in their case if they can’t work together.
Maecee Lathers sits next to her attorney, Martez Gordon, in court on Sept. 17, 2024. (WPLG)
The issue came up at a status hearing for Maecee Lathers, 25, who faces a list of charges after allegedly killing two people during a hit-and-run while high on drugs with a suspended license. Lathers, who has pleaded not guilty, is accused of running a red light on Aug. 10, 2024, and slamming her Mercedes-Benz sedan into a Suzuki, killing the driver and passenger on the bike.
Prosecutors say Lathers tried to flee the scene without rendering aid, but was stopped by bystanders. Video from police body cameras shows her on the ground, screaming and later telling officers that her name was “Mercedes” and she was “from the future.” The defendant allegedly told the officers that she had used “pink cocaine,” a powdered mix of drugs that can include cocaine, fentanyl, MDMA and methamphetamine.
Lathers was not the topic of conversation at her hearing on Wednesday; rather, the attorneys took center stage. Prosecutor Sonali Desai filed a motion on Monday, accusing defense attorney Martez Gordon of failing to comply with protocol when scheduling depositions. The motion, which Judge Tanya Brinkley noted was six pages and single-spaced, was a formal request for the Court to intervene for future depositions.
Brinkley said that she had been doing voir dire in a different trial when her judicial assistant pulled her away because of a “fiasco” at the Lathers deposition. Desai maintains that Gordon scheduled the deposition incorrectly and refused to wait for further instructions from the judge. When Brinkley asked Gordon to respond to the accusations, he demurred, saying he had just seen the motion the day before. “We thought the scope of today’s hearing would be based on the case management or status,” Gordon said.
“During the deposition, [Desai] requested court intervention,” Brinkley responded. “So when you tell me, ‘We’re not aware of it, We didn’t know, We received it but haven’t had an opportunity to review it,’ it’s somewhat disingenuous.”
Gordon maintained he had done nothing wrong and wanted to wait until he had a copy of the deposition transcript to defend himself against “inaccuracies and allegations” made in Desai’s motion. “It’s a gross exaggeration of what took place,” Gordon said.
A clearly frustrated Brinkley encouraged the two sides to work together and warned that if there is any issue during future depositions, the proceeding will need to be suspended and brought to court for a special hearing. “If that is necessary,” she said, “I’m gonna be deeply, deeply disappointed in both of you. And I can assure you that whomever I determine to be the proponent of the difficulty, I’m gonna impose sanctions.”
The parties are scheduled to return to court on June 17 for a status hearing.
