Attorney General opposes former officer’s immunity claim

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall has submitted a brief to the Court of Criminal Appeals, urging the court to reject the request from former Decatur police officer Mac Bailey Marquette, who seeks a prosecutor’s exemption related to the shooting death of Stephen Perkins.

The 43-page brief, filed by Attorney General Christie Wilkerson, contends that Marquette has not proven a “clear legal right to immunity” under Alabama’s ground law, suggesting that the court should address an ongoing de facto dispute.

The incident took place on September 29, 2023. Marquette, along with two other officers, was with a tow truck driver attempting to reclaim Perkins’ pickup. Body camera footage reveals Marquette firing 18 shots in less than two seconds while announcing her police status just before the shooting.

Marquette’s defense asserts that he acted in self-defense and should be protected from prosecution under state law, which allows for such immunity if one believes it necessary to employ lethal force to prevent harm.

Back in April, a Morgan County Circuit Court judge dismissed Marquette’s immunity claims after a two-day hearing, indicating there were significant questions remaining in the case. Marquette’s lawyer contested this decision, asserting the judge failed to adequately consider Marquette’s belief that he was in danger when Perkins allegedly pointed a gun.

Marshall’s office argued that conflicting testimonies weaken Marquette’s claims. One officer noted that they were initially present to investigate a false misdemeanor charge arising from an earlier incident between Perkins and the tow driver.

Another officer mentioned that their primary role was to “maintain peace.” Under Alabama law, a court order is required for law enforcement to engage in foreclosure efforts, which was absent in this situation.

Wilkerson’s brief also highlighted testimony from state investigator Jamie King, who stated that the officers were not positioned to support de-escalation or peacekeeping and were concealed until the shooting occurred. King emphasized that it remains uncertain whether Marquette had a legal right to participate in the property’s recovery, even if he felt threatened.

Marquette’s defense maintains that police tactics vary, asserting officers have discretion in how they handle potentially volatile situations. However, Marshall’s office countered that such discretion does not eliminate the necessity for legal clarity and accountability. The state’s view is that it is up to the judge to ascertain whether Marquette operated within legal boundaries.

Originally, Marquette’s trial was scheduled for June 9, but it was postponed at the request of the defense. The new trial date is set for September 15. Should the Court of Appeals uphold the refusal of immunity, Marquette will face trial in the Morgan County Circuit Court.