DOCUMENT 118

ELECTRONICALLY FILED
10/22/2018 4:12 PM
01-CC-2013-002134.00
CIRCUIT COURT OF
JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA
ANNE-MARIE ADAMS, CLERK

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA

BIRMINGHAM DIVISION

STATE OF ALABAMA )
)
V. ) Case Nos.: CC-2013-002134.00
) CC-2013-002135.00
)
GREER TERRY LEE )
Defendant. )

ORDER

The matter of the proposed conditional release of the Defendant, Terry Lee Greer, from
the custody of the Alabama Department of Mental Health [hereafter Department] was
presented to this Court on a Notice of Proposal for Release with Conditions filed
pursuant to Rule 25.8 of the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure.

The Court notes that Rule 25.8 of the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure
does not contemplate the issue of guilt and that issue is not before this Court; the issue
of guilt was previously adjudicated and Defendant was determined to be not guilty by
reason of mental disease or defect.

Whether or not the Defendant presently poses a real and present threat of
substantial harm to himself or others is the only issue the Court is legally bound to
consider when deciding whether to authorize the conditional release of the Defendant
with specific conditions; and that is the only issue the Court has scrutinized.

The initial hearing on this matter was held on July 12, 2018 and recessed to a
later date as the Court considered the matter [The hearing was reconvened on
October 18, 2018 after the Court received a risk assessment report and expert
 DOCUMENT 118

testimony from Dr. Glen King].

At the initial hearing Defendant was present and represented by his attorney,
Henry Lagman. The Department was also present, represented by Nancy Jones and
David Huddleston [Huddleston was not present at the October 18th hearing]. Also,
present and representing the interest of the State was Deputy District Attorney Neal
Zarzour. The surviving victim to the crime was not present but chose to address the
court by making her feelings and wishes known through a letter which was received into
evidence [State’s Exhibit 4].

The Court received testimony on this matter and the Department called several
witnesses, including Dr. Bruce Atkins who is the treating physician. Dr. Atkins testified
that Defendant’s psychosis abated during the four years he has been treated by the
Department. He testified that Defendant is no longer depressed as his depression has
subsided with the help of medication. As evidence of the success of Defendant’s
treatment Dr. Atkins informed the Court that on multiple occasions Defendant had been
attacked by other patients and he never responded with aggression or violence. Dr.
Atkins indicated that the problems associated with the past violent acts committed by
Defendant no longer exist. He concluded that the Defendant is no longer psychotic, is
not a danger to himself nor others, and Defendant has reached the maximum benefit
from the treatment offered by the Department.

Shirley Carlisle, Director of Residential Services with Hillside Group Home

informed the Court of the type of living conditions and therapy that would be offered at
the group home. She indicated that if Defendant were required to take medication the
medication would be distributed by staff. She also informed the Court that group home
staffers would provide continuous supervision at the facility, which would include
monitoring the behavior of the Defendant and other residents of the home.

Defendant Terry Greer testified on his own behalf and informed the Court that
though he does not remember most of what took place on the night of the subject
 DOCUMENT 118

incident he accepts full responsibility for his actions. He indicated that the problematic
circumstances that he was dealing with at the time, relating to his church, emotional
stress, and the medication he was taking were contributing factors to what occurred. He
stated that those factors are no longer a part of his life and he would not allow himself
to be in a similar situation.

The Court has also considered the report and testimony of Dr. Glen King who
completed a forensic risk assessment evaluation on Defendant to determine his
present mental state and whether or not he currently poses a real and present threat of
substantial harm to himself or others. Dr. King’s evaluation/risk assessment of
Defendant was ordered subsequent to the initial conditional release hearing. Dr. King
opined that “the major risk factor for Mr. Greer is his continuing intellectual decline, due
to vascular dementia, which is a slow and progressive process”. Dr. king noted in his
assessment that it was the opinion of the previous psychological examiners that at the
time of the offense, the mentioned personal factors and hardships Defendant was
dealing with in his life contributed to Defendant’s acts of violence; this included, sequela
associated with recent traumatic brain injuries and the lack of medical treatment. Dr.
King further noted that the availability of a weapon was an additional risk factor at the
time; and, that there is a potential for Defendant to engage in similar acts, given similar
circumstances that lead to the murder of his wife. However, Dr. King noted that there
are factors that make the occurrence of repeat behavior unlikely; he noted that those
specific circumstances are not present at the current time and he could not readily
identify a scenario where repeat behavior would likely occur.

Dr. King also identified several factors, referred to as protective factors, that
would reduce the likelihood of the reoccurrence of past violent behavior: which would
be adequate medical treatment for physical and mental conditions; being housed in a
supervised situation, which will prevent access to any potentially destabilizing factors;
and, the unavailability of a weapon.

Dr. King further opined that at the time of his assessment there was no indication
 DOCUMENT 118

of an imminent threat of violent behavior from Defendant and because the subject
violent incident was isolated to one occasion during Defendant’s lifetime he assessed
that sort of violent behavior is unlikely to recur.

After the evaluation and a risk assessment for violence Dr. King concluded that
Defendant has a low risk for committing future violence if transferred to the mental
health facility proposed in the motion for conditional release as this facility will monitor
Defendant on a 24 hour-7 day- a week basis; and, Defendant will receive the
appropriate medical and psychological care.

Therefore, in consideration of the proposed release conditions, the opinions of

the experts presented in the reports and during the hearing, the Court has determined
that the Defendant has received maximum benefit from treatment by the Department;
and, as it is the opinion of the Professionals of the Department and of Dr. Glen King,
Ph. D. that the Defendant no longer poses a real and present threat of substantial harm
to himself or others if released with conditions, this Court GRANTS conditional release
with the following conditions:

a. That the Defendant shall be discharged to Hillside Group Home operated by

Montgomery Area Mental Health Authority [hereinafter MAMHA]. The
Defendant shall remain in a facility owned, and operated, or supervised by
MAMHA. Such facilities may include group homes, residential care homes or
intermittently supervised apartments, as deemed clinically appropriate to the
Defendant’s progress in treatment. The Defendant will at all times remain
under the care and treatment of MAMHA while living in any of its facilities.
b. That the Defendant is not authorized and will not be permitted to be released
to a group home outside of Montgomery County without an order from this
Court.
c. That Mobile, Baldwin, Morgan and Jackson counties are EXCLUDED and
PROHIBITED as location where Defendant can reside in a group home OR
ANY OTHER RESIDENTIAL LIVING.
 DOCUMENT 118

d. That the Defendant is not permitted to visit Mobile, Baldwin, Morgan, and
Jackson counties without permission and an order from this court.
e. That the Defendant will participate in all clinics, programs, and day treatment
activities recommended or arranged for him by MAMHA.
f. That the Defendant will take all prescribed medication.
g. That the Defendant will not own or possess a firearm or any other weapon or
any item which may be construed to be a weapon.
h. That the defendant will not use illicit drugs or alcohol.
i. That the Defendant will participate in all substance abuse programs
recommended by MAMHA and will report for random drug and alcohol
screenings as recommended by said agency.
j. That Defendant not engage in violent or threatening behavior.
k. That Defendant not inquire of the whereabouts of Suzanna Greer by any
means to include of a third person, via internet, social media, or any other
means.
l. That Defendant not seek, in any manner, to determine Suzanna Greer’s
physical location.
m. That Defendant shall not physically approach Suzanna Greer either directly
or indirectly, unless agreed to or permitted by Suzanna Greer.
n. That Defendant cannot seek to make personal contact or communications of
any type with Suzanna Greer, except that Suzanna Greer initiates the contact
and it is on her own terms.
o. That Defendant is prohibited from having contact, directly or indirectly, with
Bishop Debra Wallace Padgett or Reverend Bob Alford of the North Alabama
Conference of the United Methodist Church, unless they initiate contact.
p. That the Defendant is prohibited from going on the physical premises or
properties of Christ Central United Methodist Church, Birmingham First
United Methodist Church, Decatur First United Methodist Church,
Gardendale Mount Vernon United Methodist Church, or the North Alabama
Conference Headquarters located at Birmingham Southern College; and that
Defendant is prohibited from initiating any unwanted contact, directly or
 DOCUMENT 118

indirectly, with any present or former parishioners and former or present staff
members of the aforementioned churches.

Further, if the Defendant’s mental health begins to deteriorate, i.e., mental

confusion, serious physical changes, precipitant memory loss, or agitation brought on
by psychological issues, the Defendant must seek immediate mental health treatment
from a psychiatric hospital. [The Court shall be immediately informed of any such
treatment and a hearing will be held to determine if modification of release
conditions is necessary.]

The Court shall retain jurisdiction to decide if the Defendant should be released
from the programs and supervision of MAMHA. If MAMHA or the Defendant is of the
opinion such release is appropriate, they should make application to this Court to
authorize such.

If the Defendant, during the period of his conditional release, fails materially to
comply with the terms and conditions of release, and/or if it is determined that the
Defendant can no longer be successfully treated in an out-patient program, MAMHA
shall notify the Court and the Department of such. In its notification to the Court and the
Department, MAMHA shall provide each entity with specific information concerning the
Defendant’s failure to comply with the terms and conditions of release. Following such
notification, the Court will schedule a hearing to determine whether or not the
Defendant should be recommitted to the custody of the Alabama Department of Mental
Health and his conditional release revoked or modified.

MAMHA shall submit quarterly reports to the Court regarding the Defendant’s
compliance with the conditions of release, mental health and overall progress, with
copies being sent to the District Attorney, the Defense Attorney, and to the Alabama
Department of Mental Health [Facility from which Defendant was released].
 DOCUMENT 118

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by the Court that

the Alabama Department of Mental Health is hereby authorized to conditional
release Defendant with the foregoing conditions imposed on his release.

DONE this 22nd day of October, 2018.

/s/ MICHAEL STREETY

CIRCUIT JUDGE