IN THE CRIMINAL COURTS FOR THE THIRTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT MEMPHIS DIVISION NINE. TERIYONA ARIE WINTON No. C-1707249 vs SHELBY COUNTY SHERIFF SECOND AND AMENDED ORDER ON MOTION TO RECONSIDER SAFEKEEPING TRANSFER The matteris before this Court for the purpose of the Shelby County Sheriff seeking aT.RAP. Interlocutory Appeal and stay of this Court's February 15, 2018 order entitled “Order on Motion to Reconsider Safekeeping Transfer". Ms. Winton has also filed a written response requesting that the Interlocutory Appeal and Stay be denied. The Sheriff's pleading reiterates previous arguments, butdoes not state any additional matters that were not already considered by this Court. The request for an interlocutory appeal and a stay are denied. Nevertheless, this Court has reflected upon its previous ruling, and, after further consideration of the applicable legal authorities and the arguments of the parties, this Court has concluded that it's February 15, 2018 Order reached the wrong conclusion. Accordingly, this Court orders that Teriyona Winton be removed, pursuant to T.C.A. §41-4- 121, to the Tennessee Prison for Women in Nashville for her safekeeping, pending trial in the Criminal Court of Shelby County. This “Second and Amended Order" incorporates by reference all the findings reflected in this Court's February 15, 2018 Order, except to the extent as indicated below. As fully explained in this Court's Order of February 15, 2018, this Court cannot, as a matter of law, order Ms. Winton to be housed in any juvenile facility, As such, based on the evidence before this Court, Ms. Winton must either be housed in the Shelby County 1Jail, separate and removed from all adult detainees or in the Tennessee Prison for Women, separate and removed from all adult detainees. In both cases, if Ms. Winton is the only female prisoner who is under age, she will be effectively detained in “isolation” from all other adult prisoners. This is not by design, but merely reflects the fact that a jail with only one person in it results in that person being isolated, no matter where the jail is located and no matter what amenities the jail has available. As mentioned in the February 15, 2018 Order, this Court did not and does not believe it to be in Ms. Winton’s best interest to be held in the Shelby County Jail pending her trial as the evidence presented before this Court showed that the Tennessee Prison for Women came closer to satisfying the “separate and removed" requirements of the law, was a much safer place for Ms. Winton, and offered her better living conditions and a better quality of life.' In the February 15, 2018 Order, this Court also agreed with the conclusion of the Sheriff that the Tennessee Prison for Women offered a safer environment for Ms. Winton In the February 15, 2018 Order, this Court concluded that the Shelby County Jail is ‘insufficient’ to the extent that the Sheriff is unable to fully comply with the mandate to keep the child “separate and removed from adult detainees.” This Court continues to find the Shelby County Jail to be “insufficient under Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-134. In the February 15, 2018 Order this Court also found that the Tennessee Prison for ‘Women was also “insufficient” because it was also unable to fully comply with the mandate to keep the minor child “separate and removed form adult detainees." However, this Court noted that the Tennessee Prison for Women came closer to satisfying the “separate and removed" requirements of the law, was a much safer place for Ms. Winton, and offered her Testimony before this Court also indicated that according to TDOC policy all prisoners transferred for safekeering ae classed as maximum eecunily prisoners. While NM, Winton Iving conditions are far superior in the Tennessee Prison for Women than they are in the Shelby County Jail, those conditions could be greatly improved if the TDOC would rethink this arbitrary policy and classify safekeeping prisoners on an individualized basis,better living conditions and a better quality of life. Despite this finding this Court concluded in the February 15, 2018 Order: "Nevertheless, because Tenn. Code Ann. § 41-4-121(c) only allows a safekeeping transfer to a ‘sufficient' jail, Ms. Winton is entitled, by a strict application of the law, to have this Court's previous Order of October 4, 2017, vacated as she has requested in her Motion, the result of which is her return to the Shelby County Jail for detention as an adult.” Upon reflection, this Court now believes that this conclusion was incorrect. As mentioned in the prior order, the terms “insufficient” and “sufficient” have vague meaning. “Sufficient” does not require “perfection.” According to Webster's Ninth Collegiate Dictionary, “sufficient” means “enough to meet the needs of a situation” and “suggests a close meeting of a need.” Considering this definition of the word “sufficient” and having found the Tennessee Prison for Women comes closer to satisfying the “separate and removed” requirements of the law, is a much safer place for Ms. Winton, and offers her better living conditions and a better quality of life; and having found it to be in the best interests of Ms. Winton, this Court orders that Teriyona Winton be removed, pursuant toT.C.A. §41-4-121, to the Tennessee Prison for Women in Nashville for her safekeeping, pending trial in the Criminal Court of Shelby County. However, the Sheriff will be required to transport Ms. Winton to and from her various court dates in Shelby County Criminal Court, and, in conjunction therewith, make her available to her defense counsel and her family for visitation. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Teriyona Winton be removed, pursuant to T.C.A. § 41-4-121, to the Tennessee Prison for Women in Nashville for her safekeeping, pending trial in the Criminal Court of Shelby County. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Shelby County Sheriff be responsible for transporting Ms. Winton to and from her various court hearings in Shelby County Criminal Court, and, in conjunction therewith, make her available to her defense counsel and her family for visitation.This the 12" day of March, 2018, JUDGE W. MARK WART