When courts restrict constitutional rights, they must use the least restrictive means necessary to achieve their legitimate objectives; in this case, Judge Fleischer initially ordered segregation to prevent a defendant from making 300 phone calls to a victim, but the defense argued this violated the defendant's Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights by preventing all communication including with counsel, and that less restrictive alternatives like blocking phone numbers or using letters could achieve the same protective purpose.
Deep Dive
Prerequisite Knowledge
- No data available.
Where to go next
- No data available.
Deep Dive
He Called the Victim 300 TIMES From Jail…Judge Fleischer EXPLODESAdded:
Begging and pleading, I'm not going to do it, I'm not going to do it. And now we have 300 phone calls. Put him in segregation. That's the only way. If you want to talk, please go outside.
Your honor, we're >> Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. So, we're on the record. It's cause number 2535377, 2505146.
I think that's all we have here, right?
Yes. Yes.
Okay. So, guys, for the record, please announce yourselves.
State your name for the record, please.
Anna Eadie, E A D I, for Mr. Wiggins.
Nathaniel Munier, Munier spelled M U N I E R, also for the defense.
So, hold on. Before you get into anything, state you wanted to bring something to the court's attention. Yes, Judge. So, we had um we received a call that um Mr. Wiggins was in violation of the uh protective order that was in this uh VPO, and that he was reaching out to the complaining witness in this case.
Um we have checked the jail calls. Those jail calls show that since March 24th, uh which is 24 days after the October uh VPO, since just March 24th, we have 293 calls made to the complaining phone number. Um just yesterday, we had, I believe, 28 calls to that number.
So, in one day, you're saying he made how many calls? So, yesterday, he attempted 28 calls to uh the complaining phone.
So, Judge, I'm going to preface this conversation with um I was Miss Eadie uh texted me about 10 minutes ago, so I I came up on short notice on this, but my understanding is that there's no longer protective order in fact, cuz it's been long enough that the protective order >> There's There's a court order for him not to have any contact with her. Are those part of his bond conditions?
>> Yes. My client's not on bond.
He's not supposed to have any contact with her whatsoever. I understand Judge, but the way that this court and other courts in the county have structured those conditions have been bond conditions which my client is not on a bond. He is in custody. He has not broken any >> ordered him, even though he's in custody, not to call her. I understand Judge. Assuming that he had violated some form of a court order that is not a bond condition, I believe the appropriate remedy would be contempt.
Um, and which would be a separate criminal proceeding. At the same time, for Miss Edie talked to me today, it sounds like that the court was going to order Ag Seg in the jail so that Ag the formal procedure >> that we can revoke bond privileges on someone is Ag Seg. Yes, Judge. My issue with that is it is a it's a hammer when a scalpel is needed.
So, while I understand that the District Attorney's office has alleged that my client has called a victim in this case, there's no protective order in place, the bond conditions are not in effect because he's not on bond, thus no crime has taken place, and third to that Judge, if he's to move to Ag Ag Seg, he would not be able to make any phone calls, not just to the victim, but anyone including counsel, which while we are here on a misdemeanor, he is in custody on a felony, and relatively serious felonies, and not >> The only way, but okay.
I understand your plight. Yes, Judge.
>> But there are other remedies for you to be able to communicate. Letters, in person, but the only way for me to be able to ensure that the complaining witness is not called is to put him in segregation. That's the only way. Judge, the problem is is nobody would be able to call including our office as well as his felony attorneys. Letters through the jail are notori- notoriously slow. A letter to my mother who lives in the same city takes 4 days. Add in the jail, you're taking over in willing to put him on the docket one time a week so you guys can have contact.
>> Which the problem is, Judge, we would no longer be able to have any form of um private contact, and that would only take care of the misdemeanor and not the felony. And that's being applied, Judge.
Him having conversations with us are us saying, "Hey, what's going on with the felony?" And any jail visits that take place in ad seg are actually recorded.
They're notified by counsel going through the door that those calls are being recorded.
I don't have any other option to not allow >> Well, Judge, the phone calls >> This would violate my my client's fifth, sixth, eighth, and 14th, off the top of my head, constitutional rights. Right self-incrimination because every conversation's going to be monitored going in and out of the jail because they're going to be recorded via jail visits. He will no longer be able to have private visitation inside the courthouse. You You can pull him out. You can have private visitation in the room there.
>> Judge. It's about felony court. It's a serious issue. But that's that's the felony >> you worried about felony court? Because that's why he's in, Judge. Then that's when because of ours. Our bonds are at $60,000.
>> I understand, Judge, but the reason that this is taking as long as it is and it's been taken as serious as it is is because he's in custody on a felony. And the And this court making him to where he cannot participate fully with counsel is There are other means for you guys to participate, but I've ordered you not to have contact with her. You've called her now over 300 times.
I don't understand why you guys aren't filing additional charges anyways.
Judge, I missed the last statement.
>> The only way The only way that I can prevent him from making 300 phone calls is to put him in another wing. I was going to talk with the DA, and obviously, if my client's making these calls, and that's an if, he's dialing a single number, um the jail's numbers can be easily blocked. I've done it on my cell phone numerous times when I changed cell phones. Um over the weekend I well last weekend I had 15 jail calls from one client.
And as annoying as that is, it's very easy to block it on your cell phone.
And I assume the victim could do the same. I have not heard anything from the state till the victim what to do Nathan.
I'm not going to say can you please block your number so we can call you.
The least restrictive means judge.
Strict scrutiny dealing with constitutional rights. Other way to prevent him from making phone calls.
I have acquiesced to you guys before and admonished him before. Please don't. We put you in seg last time. You were there a month.
You came here begging and pleading. I'm not going to do it. I'm not going to do it. And now we have 300 phone calls.
So I don't know what else to do. But now back in seg. I'm going to sprinkle the word allegedly to the phone calls cuz this is the kind of thing where records would exist that have not been provided to the defense by the state. Do you have the records? Well I mean I have them. I just have to get the I have to do the forms so I can get them uploaded to the portals. Yeah. Okay. So let's let's let's set it for formal hearing cuz I don't want I'm you're right. I don't want to give you state the benefit of the doubt without him actually or and actually seeing it and seeing that the phone calls were actually made. So let's set it for formal hearing. How soon can you get him the evidence?
>> [clears throat] >> And if we can keep him in normal population so that we can visit him as does his family counsel and they can Wiggins going to have you sign an affidavit to the promising me you're not going to reach out to the complaining witness in this case by any means. If you do, I can have a contempt hearing and contempt is punishable by a single time and it's punishable by up to 6 months in jail and a $500 fine per the advice of your lawyer. Because this he thinks this is the correct avenue instead of I say Do you understand? No. Don't contact the complaining witness.
Don't use anyone else to contact the complaining witness.
Don't use anyone else's number to contact the complaining witness.
I'm going to rephrase what he just said.
That means calls going through third parties. So if you call mom and have mom call her, that's against the rules. If you call mom and have mom forward the call, that's against the rules. I said real I said real.
Yeah. Okay.
This is the affidavit that you're going to sign promising me you're not going to contact her and or the complaining witness in any of my misdemeanor cases.
Do you understand? Yeah.
Okay. So you want to set it for Monday?
Yeah.
Okay.
But just get it as soon as you can. Get it to them.
Have a hearing on Monday to see whether he's actually making phone calls that we ordered him not.
This is you swearing that you will not make these calls.
>> And let it be clear that it truly have no least restrictive means than to deny his ability to make phone calls to the complaining witness. There really is no less restrictive means. Judge, my understanding is that the jail can prevent Mr. Wiggins' spin number from calling them.
>> They He In the last time, he used someone else's spin number to make the phone calls. And was that So Well, we'll see this time. I don't know.
Okay. All right.
>> [music] [music]
Related Videos
BREAKING: Judge Kathleen Issues Emergency Arrest Warrant After Trump Defies Order
Frontora
2K views•2026-05-29
8 Hidden Things About Mackenzie Shirilla Netflix's 'The Crash' Didn't Show You
MarvelousVideos
2K views•2026-05-28
MP Garnett Genuis warns Canada’s MAiD system has ‘gone too far’
WesternStandard
187 views•2026-05-28
THE STREISAND EFFECT AT BARBARA STREISAND’S HOUSE! - First Amendment Audit
KULTNEWS
1K views•2026-05-30
Trump Impeachment STORM IGNITES as 29 Judges Vote for Conviction!!
DanielBriefDaily
2K views•2026-06-02
EBK Jaaybo Won’t Be Going To Trial?! | Criminal Lawyer Reacts
floridadefenseteam
404 views•2026-05-29
OFFICE HOURS: The Theft of Black Brilliance... AI and Intellectual Property (w/ Lisa E. Davis)
marclamonthillnetwork
2K views•2026-05-29
सुप्रीम कोर्ट में 5 जजों का शपथग्रहण समारोह #supremecourt #judges #oathceremony #shorts #ytshorts
Bharat24Liv
4K views•2026-06-02











