Defendant Rejects 20-Year Deal — GETS 50 YEARS For Murder!

Añadido: 2026-06-01

[00:00:00]You are Michelle Lee Cormier.

[00:00:02]And Ms. Cormier is charged with the first degree felony offense of murder in cause number 25 DCCR0153.

[00:00:11]Mr. Radford has filed There's a motion to quash the indictment. The state has filed a reply.

[00:00:22]Obviously, I've looked through both of these. Um I guess I'm confused, Mr. Radford, when you say it doesn't allege the re- the requisite mens rea for murder.

[00:00:35]Judge, if I may, the common law has established that murder is when someone intentionally and knowingly causes the death of >> statute is what we're going to go by.

[00:00:45]>> Yes, ma'am. But I I don't think it was the intention of the legislature to remove the requisite mens rea. What makes you think that? Because the common law going back a thousand years has required murder to be intentionally and knowingly.

[00:01:00]>> But they've added section B4, which it's a little confusing because the caption states it's 1902C, but the way it reads is the way B4 reads under 1902, which requires only knowingly, not intentional. Knowingly manufactures or delivers a controlled substance included in penalty group 1B, blah blah blah.

[00:01:23]That's fentanyl. That's what the allegation is. And so, it actually has the mens rea of knowingly deliver It I mean, it reads straight from the statute. So, I'm going to deny that motion to quash.

[00:01:33]>> Can I Can I >> Sure.

[00:01:34]>> just make a brief argument? Yeah. Under this indictment, under the way that it's it's pled, if a doctor gives a patient fentanyl, uh and that patient dies, then that doctor can be charged with murder, even though he did not intentionally or knowingly Well, there's an exception. The next C, except as provided Well, which where was it I saw this.

[00:01:58]It is a defense to the prosecution under Section B4, which is our section, that the actor's conduct in manufacturing or delivering was authorized under Chapter uh 481 Health and Safety Code or state or federal law, which I think would be the medical purposes.

[00:02:12]>> So, So, there's an exception.

[00:02:14]>> my understanding then is the court of of the opinion that the state must prove that my client knowingly delivered fentanyl to an individual?

[00:02:26]That's what the law says, and that's what the indictment says.

[00:02:30]I uh Did then and there knowingly deliver a controlled substance, namely fentanyl, and that Shelby Irvin died as a result of ingesting inhaling that into her body.

[00:02:41]So, So, that it's the opinion of the court that Ms. Courtney Irvin must have the requisite knowledge that she was giving her fentanyl. It just occurred to I think that's here. I I think Go ahead.

[00:02:51]what Mr. Rapp is trying to do is box Courtney Irvin. I'm not going to My interpretation of the statute is just knowingly deliver a controlled This is where the hearing gets dangerously technical. The defense is trying to force the court to answer one huge question. Does the accused have to know the substance was fentanyl specifically, or just know they delivered drugs in general? That difference could decide the entire case. And notice the judge's wording here. She's practically signaling that this may become a jury battle later. Do you think ignorance should matter in a fentanyl death case?

[00:03:19]substance. And that controlled substance, if it contains fentanyl, is enough for her to be guilty of the No, I'm not arguing.

[00:03:26]If it contains fentanyl and causes the death of a person, then that gets us to matter. Well, I think that's going to be another whole question because it's specific that it's >> knowingly to >> knowingly deliver a controlled substance, namely fentanyl. So, I think that's going to come down to maybe a jury question. I don't think that's I'm not going to make that decision.

[00:03:47]Um that's not a All right. I mean, that's just an element of offense. So, the motion to quash is denied. Yes, ma'am. I would submit that the statute is unconstitutional as drafted. Okay.

[00:04:00]I'm not going to find the statute >> I understand.

[00:04:03]I'm going to follow it as written.

[00:04:05]>> Yes, ma'am. All right. So, that's denied. Hold on just a second.

[00:04:10]Uh Mr. Radford has also filed a motion to reduce the bond. Do you plan on calling your uh client Ma'am, the best you can, raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give in this hearing will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Yes, sir. Thank you. You may proceed. For the purposes of the hearing, this hearing only, we call Michelle Cormier on the issue of bond reduction. Can you state your name >> Just so you know, once she's under I mean, there are I'm I don't let anybody go far, but if she's under oath and I am allowed to take into consideration some of the um underlying facts of the case.

[00:04:45]>> Yes, ma'am. We won't go far, but just don't want you to think that we're not go can't go there at all.

[00:04:49]>> Yes, ma'am. I understand.

[00:04:51]Uh can you state your name for the record? Michelle Lake Lanier. And you are the defendant in this case, is this correct?

[00:04:56]>> Yes, sir. And your bond is currently set at $500,000, is that correct? Yes, sir.

[00:05:01]Can you afford a $500,000 bond? Yes.

[00:05:05]Do you have assets uh in your name that you could liquidate to make a bond?

[00:05:11]Not in my name, no. Your family has Your family can help you.

[00:05:15]Uh have you talked to your family about possibly helping you with your bond? Yes, sir. And how much What what kind of bond do you think your family can come up with?

[00:05:29]A hundred [clears throat] thousand or less. That's what I've always been told by my attorney. A hundred thousand, you think they can make a hundred thousand dollar bond?

[00:05:36]Uh would it assist your case in the presentation of your defense if you were bonded out and could assist me in working on your case? Yes, sir.

[00:05:48]Uh where were you born? I was born in Beaumont, Texas. Okay, have you lived here how long?

[00:05:54]I've been back in down in this area since I was 13 years old, so. So, you've pretty much lived here your whole life?

[00:06:01]>> Yes, sir. And you have family in this area?

[00:06:03]>> Yes, sir.

[00:06:04]Uh Jasper area, my aunt here in Beaumont.

[00:06:09]Where would you live if you made bond?

[00:06:13]The Golden Triangle, Beaumont, or um >> [clears throat] >> I Who would you live with? My aunt, my 83-year-old aunt that comes and sees me, or my son and his grandma in Vidor. My aunt lives here in Beaumont off of Major Drive. If the court set conditions of your bond including a GPS monitor uh and random drug uh testing, would you agree with that? Yes, sir, I sure will. Uh what is your criminal history? Have you been to TDC before? Yes, sir, I went to a program at a rehabilitation back in 2019.

[00:06:45]How much time did you serve? I served I made my first parole, and I served 2 and 1/2 on that 10 because they sent me to SAFP.

[00:06:55]And I successfully came off of parole on July the 11th of 2023.

[00:07:02]That's a week. I want to know I'm trying to re- I think it's probably in this reply um what was Ms. Cormier in custody Whoa.

[00:07:12]That's it in a nutshell. Might be the most damaging sentence said in this entire hearing. The judge summarized the allegation in plain English, and the defendant appeared to agree with it on the record. You can immediately hear the defense attorney jump in to stop the conversation before it turns into a courtroom disaster. That's the tightrope in bond hearings. One wrong answer can echo all the way into trial. before what they have to put on the state jail.

[00:07:35]When this happened, okay? So, the allegations here are that you were in custody for theft Can I rephrase [clears throat] that? No.

[00:07:43]No. Just answer her question.

[00:07:45]>> In custody, smuggled in some drugs of some type in your vagina that you gave to someone else that the allegation is led to her death that had fentanyl in it. Am I correct?

[00:07:58]>> That's That's it in a nutshell, Judge.

[00:07:59]All right. Go ahead, Mr. Um >> [clears throat] >> Coleman.

[00:08:04]Um and you don't disagree with the judge's assessment that you in fact smuggled fentanyl into the jail.

[00:08:11]>> I'm going to object as to that. I think you said the allegations are what he's trying to do now is bind her into a confession.

[00:08:19]I'll move on, Judge. Thank you. Um while you were in jail, did you provide a controlled substance or substances to other fellow inmates? Again, Judge, I'm going to object >> [clears throat] >> that that is not relevant at this time.

[00:08:33]I'll move on, Judge. Thank you. Uh where did you get those drugs? I'm going to object at this time, Your Honor, to that. [clears throat] It's not relevant.

[00:08:39]>> of those are going to go to her Fifth Amendment again self-incrimination, Mr. One last question. Uh when you were arrested on this on the theft out of the aspect in November of 2024, did you have a pending uh felony drug case in Orange County?

[00:08:57]Had you been arrested for methamphetamine possession in Orange County? Yes, ma'am. I mean, yes, sir.

[00:09:02]That's all right.

[00:09:03]What's the status of that case? Is it still pending?

[00:09:05]>> Still pending as far as we know. Okay. I don't think it's been filed.

[00:09:08]Okay.

[00:09:10]They're waiting on it. You could take her.

[00:09:12]testing.

[00:09:14]Okay. Anything else?

[00:09:16]No, ma'am.

[00:09:17]Um [clears throat] all right. Based on the criteria under 17.15, the information that I have, the nature of the offense, I'm going to deny the petition or the request for a reduction in bond. I think 500,000 is adequate based on the nature of all of those con- um matters.

[00:09:37]All right. anything else then on this case? No, ma'am. All right, we'll reset it for an announcement.

[00:09:43]>> Thank you. May I be excused? Yes, thank you. Judge, for the announcement purposes, I'm waiting on a report from my expert, and I anticipate that that will be early June. Okay, we'll just do a normal reset. We'll see where we are at that point. Thank you.

[00:09:56]You can go back with the bailiff. All right, sir, are you Howard Celestine?

[00:09:59]Yes, ma'am. And Ms. Proske, will your client waive the formal reading of the indictment in each case?

[00:10:04]>> waive the formal reading. Mr. Celestine, in cause number 24 DCCR 0919, you're charged with a third-degree felony offense of manufacturing or delivering a controlled substance from January 10th of 2024. That indictment alleges that you were previously convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child, a first-degree felony, April 13th of 2009. And how do you plead to that charge? Guilty.

[00:10:30]Are you pleading guilty freely and voluntarily? Yes. And because you did what they charged you with? Yes.

[00:10:36]>> [clears throat] >> And is that prior offense true? That prior conviction?

[00:10:41]Yes. The one that I read out, the aggravated sexual assault of a child, is that uh true that that is a prior conviction of yours? Yes. Okay. In cause number 24 DCCR 1549, it says count one only, but then it says a 20-year term, so it has to be count one and two.

[00:10:58]>> That was my intent.

[00:10:59]That's That's right. Count one and two.

[00:11:02]Okay. Oh.

[00:11:05]There's only one one prior.

[00:11:08]Right.

[00:11:09]>> So, that's what makes that third-degree turn into a second.

[00:11:12]>> Oh.

[00:11:13]Oh, okay. Sorry. So, pleading on count one would only be to the underlying offense.

[00:11:17]>> Right. Okay, so in 24 DCCR 1549, you're charged with a second-degree felony offense of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon from June 24th of 2024.

[00:11:29]The indictment alleges that same prior conviction um from April 13th of 2009 and how do you plead to that charge?

[00:11:37]Again, are you pleading guilty freely and voluntarily?

[00:11:40]And again, is that prior conviction true?

[00:11:44]And did you enter your plea of guilty in this case freely and voluntarily?

[00:11:48]And because you actually did what they charged you with?

[00:11:52]So, in cause number 24DCCR1550, you're charged with a first-degree felony offense of murder from June 24th 2024 and the state's elected to proceed on that count only and how do you plead to that charge?

[00:12:08]Again, are you pleading guilty freely and voluntarily?

[00:12:12]And because you did what they charged you with?

[00:12:15]In cause number 24DCCR1551, you're charged in that case with the state jail felony offense of abandoning or endangering a child from June 24th of 2024 and how do you plead to that charge?

[00:12:28]Again, are you pleading guilty freely and voluntarily?

[00:12:32]And because you did what they charged you with?

[00:12:34]>> [music] >> In each of these cases, I have here on the computer some documents that have your signature on them that the state has marked as exhibit number one. Before you signed these, did you go over them with Miss Perazzo?

[00:12:47]Do you fully understand them?

[00:12:49]And do you understand if I follow the agreements that you've reached with the district attorney, you'll be waiving or giving up any right to appeal?

[00:12:56]Um do you also understand if you're not a US citizen that a plea of guilty or no contest may result in your deportation, exclusion from admission to the country, or denial of naturalization under federal law?

[00:13:08]State tenders number one in each case.

[00:13:11]It's admitted in each case. Is there any evidence that Mr. Celestine is not competent?

[00:13:16]All right, sir. In each of your cases, I'm going to find that you entered your pleas of guilty and true and the cases that you did freely and voluntarily. Um find that you're mentally competent and you understand the nature and the consequences of your pleas in each case.

[00:13:29]In cause number 24 DCCR 0919, find sufficient evidence to find you guilty and at this time find you guilty of manufacturing or delivering a controlled substance. Find that prior conviction true. Sentence you in accordance with your agreement to a term of 20 years in the institutional division of the Texas Department of Corrections. You will receive credit on that sentence for any time that you've been in custody that the law gives you the right to receive.

[00:13:54]In cause number 20 And just like that, the numbers become real. 20 years, 50 years, another 50 years. But because they run concurrently, the actual controlling sentence is 50 years. Still, hearing murder, deadly weapon, and child endangerment stack together in one proceeding is brutal. Also, notice how calm the courtroom stays while life-changing sentences are handed down.

[00:14:18]Do you think courts should show more emotion in moments like this? 4 DCCR 1549, also find that you entered your plea of guilty freely and voluntarily. Find sufficient evidence to find you guilty and at this time find you guilty of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

[00:14:33]Find that prior conviction true.

[00:14:35]Sentence you in accordance with your agreement to a term of 50 years in the institutional division of the Texas Department of Corrections. You will also receive credit on that sentence for any time that you've been in custody that the law gives you the right to receive.

[00:14:48]In cause number 24 DCCR 1550, find sufficient evidence to find you guilty and at this time or find that you entered your plea of freely and voluntarily. Find sufficient evidence to find you guilty and at this time find you guilty of the offense of murder.

[00:15:03]Sentence you in accordance with your agreement to a term of 50 years in the institutional division of the Texas Department of Corrections. You will receive credit on that sentence for any time that you've been in custody that the law gives you the right to receive.

[00:15:15]And then finally in cause number 24 DCCR 1551, find sufficient evidence to find you guilty and at this time find you guilty of the state jail felony offense of abandoning or endangering a child, sentencing you in accordance with your agreement to a term of two years in the state jail prison. You will receive credit on that sentence for any time that you've been in custody that the law gives you the right to receive. These cases will all run concurrently, which means together at the same time. I am making an affirmative finding of a deadly weapon in cause number 24 DCCR 1549.

[00:15:49]I'm handing you in all of your cases the trial court certifications that shows that these were agreements that I followed and so you've waived your right to appeal. I have also handed you a written admonishment regarding your ineligibility to possess a firearm or ammunition. Because of the judgments entered against you, you're ineligible under Texas law to possess a firearm or ammunition.

[00:16:10]Possession of a firearm or ammunition could lead to charges against you.

[00:16:14]Firearm is a legal term. You should read the written admonishment I provided you to see what devices qualify as a firearm. If you have questions about the laws that make you ineligible to possess a firearm or ammunition or about how long that lasts, you can talk to Ms. Peraza. All right, good luck to you, sir. You can go back with the bailiff.

[00:16:32]Okay.