Douglas L. ‘Monte’ Tynes, Jr.

Douglas L. Tynes, Jr., who prefers to go by the much more informal ‘Monte’ Tynes, is a second-generation attorney, who began practicing law with his father, Douglas L. Tynes, in 2006. After the latter’s retirement in May 2013, Mr Tynes continued practicing in the same historic building where his father had worked for more than 30 years.

Mr Tynes is a devoted practitioner of the law. He goes the extra mile to become better acquainted with his client by making house calls, so he may know them in their surroundings. Mr. Tynes makes sure that his team at Tynes Law Firm share his work ethic and is equally understanding of the needs of his clients.

Mr. Tynes’ practice includes:

· Automobile accidents

· 18-wheeler accidents

· Medical malpractice

· Criminal law

· Family law cases such as divorce, custody, and child support

Mr Tynes is admitted to practice in all state courts in Mississippi, as well as the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Education:

Mississippi College School of Law, 2002-2005

· Active in the Mississippi Trial Lawyers Association student chapter

· Earned a Juris Doctorate in May of 2005

University of Mississippi School of Law, 2004-2005

· Finished final year of law school as a visiting student

Georgia Institute of Technology, 1998-2002

· Earned Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering

· Member of the American Society of Civil Engineers and Sigma Phi Epsilon

· Wrote for The Technique, the school’s weekly newspaper

· While attending school full time, also worked at Pond & Co., Architects and Engineers

Ocean Springs High School

· Graduated with High Honors

· Lettered in football and soccer

· Part of civic organizations such as Phi Kappa

Representative Clients:

Mr. Tynes has an impressive success rate when fighting complex and challenging cases. He has also obtained favorable results in several other kinds of cases, such as a recent $260,000.00 verdict in a sexual harassment case against former Sheriff Mike Byrd.

In one of his most rewarding cases, Mr. Tynes, along with his co-counsel, obtained a rare acquittal in a capital murder case in ‘State of Mississippi v Tevin James Benjamin’.

Personal Life:

A longtime resident of the Mississippi Gulf Coast, Monte is passionate about his family, fishing, and anything to do with Georgia Tech.

He is married to Leilani Tynes, and they have four beautiful children.

The Supreme Court has noted that bail and the refusal to set bail also implicate the right to due process found in the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution. As a result, the Supreme Court has held that a judge must provide a “compelling governmental interest” for keeping a defendant in jail pending trial (in other words, refusing to set bail). (United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 754-55 (1987).)

The constitutional protections, as well as the Bail Reform Act (a federal statute), give a defendant the right to request lower bail when the amount initially set by the court is too high to pay. A defendant can request a hearing to seek a bail reduction.

At the hearing, the defendant can argue that the initial bail set by the court is so high that it is effectively a denial of bail and amounts to pretrial detention in jail, even though the defendant is not a flight risk or a threat to the public. (18 USC § 3142 (c)(2).) Although the court must take this argument into consideration, it is not required to set bail at a level that the defendant can easily pay. Courts can set bail high enough “to induce a defendant to go to great lengths to raise the funds without violating” the constitution or the Bail Reform Act. (U.S. v. Szot, 768 F.2d 159 (7thCir., 1985).) As long as the court’s actual motive is not to just force the defendant to rot in jail awaiting trial, the court can set bail at any level it can justify.

Once a defendant informs the court, through a bail reduction request or otherwise, that she cannot afford the bail set, the court must specify the reason(s) that the amount set is “an indispensable” condition of release from jail. (U.S. v. Montececon-Zayas, 949 F.2d 548 (1st Cir. 1991).) The court must set out its rationale in writing. (Fed. Rule of App. Proced. 9.)

Just as the defendant has the right to seek a lower bail, the prosecution can request that the court set a higher level of bail based on the risk that the defendant will flee from the jurisdiction or inflict harm upon a victim or other members of the public. (18 USC § 3142 (f).) And, the court may hold a hearing to inquire into the source of bail funds that it suspects may be illegal (proceeds from drug sales, for example). Bail is only one of the conditions that a court may impose in order to grant release of a defendant from jail pending trial. Other conditions include travel restrictions, relinquishing a passport, drug testing, electronic monitoring devices (ankle bracelets), house arrest, supervision and reporting during release, and others.