A Michigan man with a suspended driver's license joined a digital court hearing about his case from behind the wheel of a vehicle he was driving.

Corey Harris did not physically appear in court for his hearing on May 15. Instead, he dialed into the Zoom call — while he was driving, according to video of the hearing posted on Washtenaw County Judge Cedric Simpson’s YouTube page.

Simpson asked Harris whether he was driving when he joined the hearing. Harris told Simpson that he was pulling into a parking spot at his doctor's office and would be ready for the hearing in "one second."

After a brief pause and Simpson confirming Harris was "stationary," the attorney representing Harris, Natalie Pate, who was in court that day, asked for an adjournment of two to four weeks.

"OK, so maybe I don't understand something," Simpson said after having reviewed the case in front of him. "This is a driving while license suspended?"

Pate confirmed he was looking at a case involving driving without a license.

"And he was just driving? And he doesn't have a license?" Simpson asked.

"Those are the charges, yes," Pate said, but Simpson quickly replied: "No, I'm looking at his record. He doesn't have a license. He's suspended, and he's just driving."

Pate, again, confirmed the judge was correct.

Simpson then looked around the courtroom, taking a long pause, an incredulous smile on his face.

He then looked up and said, "I don't even know why he would do that," referring to Harris, who was still on the Zoom call from his car.

Simpson then revoked Harris' bond and instructed him to turn himself into the Washtenaw County Jail by that evening.

Harris dropped his head back and said, "Oh, my God."

It was not immediately clear whether Harris had turned himself in as Simpson requested.

A representative for the court said the judge does not comment on pending cases. Pate could not immediately be reached for comment Wednesday.

The incident has drawn significant attention, both locally and online, due to the audacious nature of Harris's actions. The video clip of the hearing quickly went viral, with many viewers expressing disbelief at Harris’s decision to drive to his court hearing for driving with a suspended license.

Judge Simpson's reaction was a mix of incredulity and frustration, as he repeatedly emphasized the absurdity of Harris’s behavior. "The sheer audacity of joining a court hearing for driving with a suspended license while actively driving is beyond comprehension," Simpson remarked during the hearing.

Legal experts have weighed in on the situation, noting that Harris's actions could lead to additional charges beyond the original offense. "This kind of behavior not only shows a blatant disregard for the law but also a lack of respect for the judicial process," said legal analyst Mark Hutchins. "It's likely that the judge's decision to revoke his bond was influenced by the immediate demonstration of his willingness to continue breaking the law."

Community members have also expressed their views on the matter, with many taking to social media to voice their opinions. "It's hard to believe someone would be that careless, especially when facing serious charges," commented one resident. "This just shows how some people think they're above the law."

In the legal community, the incident has sparked discussions about the need for clearer guidelines and stricter protocols for virtual court appearances. "With the increase in virtual court proceedings due to the pandemic, there needs to be a clear understanding of what is acceptable behavior," said attorney Jessica Morgan. "This case highlights the potential for abuse and the importance of maintaining the integrity of the judicial process, even in a virtual environment."

As the case progresses, Harris’s actions during the hearing are likely to be scrutinized further. The outcome of his case could set a precedent for how such behavior is addressed in the future. Meanwhile, Judge Simpson’s handling of the situation has been praised for its decisiveness and clarity, reinforcing the message that the law must be respected, regardless of the medium through which it is administered.

The broader implications of this incident also touch on the ongoing adaptation of the legal system to digital platforms. Ensuring that justice is served fairly and appropriately in a virtual setting continues to be a challenge, and cases like Harris’s underscore the need for vigilance and adaptability in maintaining judicial standards.

Moreover, this incident may prompt further review of how individuals on bond are monitored to prevent similar occurrences. Legal experts suggest that stricter enforcement of bond conditions and better education on the responsibilities of those out on bond could help prevent such blatant violations. This case serves as a reminder that the transition to digital platforms in the judicial system, while beneficial in many ways, requires robust safeguards to uphold the integrity and seriousness of legal proceedings.