ILNews

Drug court lawsuits in the works

Dave Stafford
February 12, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Destiny Hoffman furnished a diluted drug screen and was sanctioned with a 48-hour stay in the Clark County Jail. She wasn’t freed for another five months.

Jason O’Connor was given a 30-day drug court sanction on June 20 of last year, but he lingered behind bars in Jeffersonville until Jan. 24 – more than 180 days longer.

clifford-nathan.jpg Clifford

Nathan S. Clifford also was detained months longer than he should have been.

They’re not the only ones.

“I would anticipate we’re going to find more of these,” said Nathan Masingo, a public defender who represented Hoffman until she pleaded guilty to a Class D felony possession of a controlled substance charge last year and was diverted to drug court. As is customary after someone enters drug court, Masingo then withdrew from the case. He knew nothing of Hoffman’s protracted detention.

“I don’t believe you can waive your right to due process” in instances resulting in loss of liberty, Masingo said. “It appears the court believes (drug court defendants’) due-process rights have been waived and they can go forward and incarcerate people without an attorney present and without due process.”

Hoffman, O’Connor, Clifford and others claim their rights were violated when they were jailed for drug court violations without a hearing and/or without representation of a lawyer. The three were released in late January when a deputy prosecutor reviewing files discovered they had been in jail for months, then rushed to the courthouse to petition for their release.

judge-order-15col.jpg The notice that kept Destiny Hoffman jailed until further order of the court. (Submitted photo)

The wrongful detentions are just one problem alleged against the Clark County Drug Treatment Court overseen by Circuit No. 2 Judge Jerry Jacobi.

Louisville attorney Michael Augustus is representing Hoffman, O’Connor and Clifford, as well as Amy Bennett, Josh Foley and Ashleigh Hendricks Santiago, three more drug court participants who he said intend to sue over alleged civil-rights abuses out of Jacobi’s drug court. Augustus expects additional plaintiffs.

“The common thread is that they were incarcerated without the full hearing and due-process rights afforded to them,” Augustus said.

“I’d like to say I’m shocked,” he said, “but I wasn’t. It was so pervasive and happened with so many individuals that it couldn’t be an isolated error or someone falling through the cracks. … It just appears to me there wasn’t consideration of these people’s rights.”

Jacobi did not respond to messages seeking comment.

Along with the threat of federal civil rights litigation, which Augustus said might qualify as a class action, criminal charges could arise from alleged drug court abuses.

On Feb. 4, Clark County Prosecutor Steven D. Stewart requested appointment of a special prosecutor “to avoid the appearance of impropriety during any further investigation and prosecution of this case, if any.”

Stewart petitioned Clark Circuit No. 3 Judge Joseph Weber to make the appointment. “Indiana State Police … opened an investigation relating to allegations of abuses by officers and employees of the Clark Circuit Court No. 2 Drug Court.” Weber has appointed Jefferson County Prosecutor Chad Lewis to determine if criminal charges are warranted.

Indiana State Police public information officer Sgt. Jerry Goodin of District 45 in Sellersburg said he couldn’t comment on the investigation.

In addition to improper detentions, current and former drug court staff members have been accused of unauthorized arrests and searches of drug court participants. Jacobi recently fired drug court director Susan Knoebel and suspended a drug court staff member, both of whom were accused of carrying out the arrests and searches. Knoebel told the News and Tribune of Jeffersonville she was acting on Jacobi’s orders. She has retained an attorney for a potential civil case over her firing.

Indiana Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathryn Dolan said the Judicial Qualifications Commission, which has disciplinary authority over judges, has not filed charges against Jacobi. Dolan could not confirm or deny the existence of complaints regarding Jacobi or the court because of the confidential nature of such investigations.

Attorneys familiar with the county’s drug court procedures who spoke on condition of anonymity described a court in which defendants were frequently jailed for extended periods of time without a hearing or an attorney present. Some attorneys said they feared problems were so significant that they could lead to the drug court’s demise.

Often, attorneys said, Jacobi imposed sanctions during group court settings, or ordered drug court participants held pending placement in a treatment facility. When no such placements were available, they remained in jail.

That was the case for O’Connor, who was terminated from a rehab program, after which Jacobi sanctioned him to 30 days in jail on June 20, 2013, according to O’Connor’s case record. But in the same entry ordering the sanction, the record shows another order from Jacobi: “Continue to hold in CCJ (Clark County Jail) until further order from the court.”

No further entries appear on O’Connor’s case record until Jan. 24, 2014, after the deputy prosecutor moved for a hearing and O’Connor was released.

Jacobi also ordered Hoffman held until further order after he imposed a 48-hour sanction in August. Hoffman also was released in late January.

Augustus said Hoffman and O’Connor were in a sort of legal limbo. He said they spoke up to question their detentions, but with no defender, “everything fell on deaf ears.”

hoffman-destiny.jpg Hoffman

In several cases, chronological case summary minute entries were made several days after orders were issued or actions were taken. Attorneys said in some cases drug court participants appear to have been detained without orders from the court appearing on case records.

Augustus said attention focused on the drug court after a Jeffersonville resident expressed alarm to a local official when she witnessed drug court staff members handcuffing and searching a program participant.

That’s what happened to Amy Bennett, Augustus said. She arrived at her home where drug court staff members stopped her and placed her in handcuffs, he said.

“It’s definitely systemic,” Augustus said. He’s unsure whether court staff members were acting on orders or were given too much leeway and too little supervision. “If, in fact, they were given orders to do what they did, it still doesn’t for me explain why they did it.”

Masingo, the public defender, said the court has a poor reputation in the local legal community.

“Anyone who goes in that court would have told you there were problems coming,” he said. “I didn’t know it was to this extent.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Question please
    South Florida, wow, what a story you have! What jurisdiction? You need to get it to the media. Parents brought pro se § 1983 action against, among others, child services caseworker, county health department employees, police officer, county health clinic, city, county, state child services department, and department director, alleging, inter alia, that their baby was taken from them in violation of their constitutional rights. . Rangel v. Reynolds, 607 F. Supp. 2d 911 (N.D. Ind. 2009)
  • i was kicked out of drug court, incarcerated, then transferred to mental health court
    I had just had a baby by c section 4 weeks before they arrested me and told me I had a dirty urine test after being sober for almost 2 years. I got urine tested every day for those 2 years, given the time to go in by a hotline they set up that we had to call at exactly 7AM. If it hadn't been for my amazing lawyer, I would have gone to prison. I got released after 3 months because they transferred me to another court after my lawyer fought the charges and allegations. After I got released I had to go back to the treatment center that same morning for a meeting with the director. She told me that they had mad a mistake and they new my urine wasn't dirty but I didn't have a place in the other program. When I had been in the first program, 6 months in, my case manager told me to violate my probation on purpose so they could transfer me into the different program. They threatened to kick me and my fiancé out because we were both in the program. They told us if we got married, they would kick us both out. They hinted and mentioned me getting an abortion or else I would be kicked out and have to serve my prison sentence. There are so many things that were screwed up...but I finally graduated the program and moved across the country the day I got my signed papers from the judge. I have never been so insanely confused by life as I was around those people. You are used as a pawn for the judges political re-election agenda, the employees anger and general "little man syndrome", or because you encourage other people to stand up for their civil rights. I was jailed for a week because I "disrespected" an employee by talking to them with an "uneven tone". I never swore, touched them, or anything like that. Dude. This is serious stuff.
    • wrongful incarserations without an attorney present by laporte county drugcourt
      Hello currently just withdrew from laporte county drug court and now I have lost the woman I love which also was in drugcourt and was put in jail without a,lawyer presentfor her own safety according to the judge and they told her she could have a hearing in two weeks and now going on 30days and still in jail no court date and her public defender talks like he,s bout to just sell her up the river.
    • Mental Health Court doing the same thing
      My daughter has Autism and after she told the judge she did not understand what her rights where and signing a plea bargain with her time suspended they waived her into mental health court. She has been sitting in the jail for about 6 months now and was told she gets NO lawyer. All this after her plea bargain said she was going to be released. When I call the court to ask when she is going to be released they get upset with me and tell me when they find appropriate housing. Whats wrong with my home? They have only made effort to contact one place who by the way has accepted her and is just waiting for the courts to do something. I assume since she is disabled she no longer has the right to due process, nor does she have any other constitutional rights? The man who kidnapped her and got her hooked on drugs was already released, even though he has an extensive criminal history. This is my daughters first time in any trouble, and though she does have some part in her actions the system has failed her.
    • wrongful incarceration
      Less than an hour after signing up for drug court, I was given a seven day sanction for a dirty urine. I had not even found out my schedule for observation. I never saw the woman who was supposedly giving me this info. I neither saw a judge or a lawyer. I was not allowed to speak for myself and was never advised that a procedure like this could possibly take place. I was brought back to court the following day and released. I was told "they made a mistake". I would advise anyone to consider alternatives to this program

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. A high ranking Indiana supreme Court operative caught red handed leading a group using the uber offensive N word! She must denounce or be denounced! (Or not since she is an insider ... rules do not apply to them). Evidence here: http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

    2. A high ranking bureaucrat with Ind sup court is heading up an organization celebrating the formal N word!!! She must resign and denounce! http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

    3. ND2019, don't try to confuse the Left with facts. Their ideologies trump facts, trump due process, trump court rules, even trump federal statutes. I hold the proof if interested. Facts matter only to those who are not on an agenda-first mission.

    4. OK so I'll make this as short as I can. I got a call that my daughter was smoking in the bathroom only her and one other girl was questioned mind you four others left before them anyways they proceeded to interrogate my daughter about smoking and all this time I nor my parents got a phone call,they proceeded to go through her belongings and also pretty much striped searched my daughter including from what my mother said they looked at her Brest without my consent. I am furious also a couple months ago my son hurt his foot and I was never called and it got worse during the day but the way some of the teachers have been treating my kids they are not comfortable going to them because they feel like they are mean or don't care. This is unacceptable in my mind i should be able to send my kids to school without worry but now I worry how the adults there are treating them. I have a lot more but I wanted to know do I have any attempt at a lawsuit because like I said there is more that's just some of what my kids are going through. Please respond. Sincerely concerned single parent

    5. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13) Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety. The full report is available online at. http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America. The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx? ID=247350 The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483 Conclusion. The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates. The full report is available online at. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483 These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. People, including the media and other organizations should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or other people as to the need for these laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. They should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 0.8% (page 30) The full report is available online at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) (page 38) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% The full report is available online at. http://www.google.com/url?sa= t&source=web&cd=1&ved= 0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.cdcr.ca.gov%2FAdult_ Research_Branch%2FResearch_ documents%2FOutcome_ evaluation_Report_2013.pdf&ei= C9dSVePNF8HfoATX-IBo&usg=AFQjCNE9I6ueHz-o2mZUnuxLPTyiRdjDsQ Bureau of Justice Statistics 5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The full report is available online at. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013 Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy. A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7% Link to Report: http://www.oncefallen.com/files/Washington_SO_Recid_2005.pdf Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009. The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05% Link to Report: http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so. Megan’s law is a failure and is destroying families and their children’s lives and is costing tax payers millions upon millions of dollars. The following is just one example of the estimated cost just to implement SORNA which many states refused to do. From Justice Policy Institute. Estimated cost to implement SORNA Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M. For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf. Attempting to use under-reporting to justify the existence of the registry is another myth, or a lie. This is another form of misinformation perpetrated by those who either have a fiduciary interest in continuing the unconstitutional treatment of a disfavored group or are seeking to justify their need for punishment for people who have already paid for their crime by loss of their freedom through incarceration and are now attempting to reenter society as honest citizens. When this information is placed into the public’s attention by naive media then you have to wonder if the media also falls into one of these two groups that are not truly interested in reporting the truth. Both of these groups of people that have that type of mentality can be classified as vigilantes, bullies, or sociopaths, and are responsible for the destruction of our constitutional values and the erosion of personal freedoms in this country. I think the media or other organizations need to do a in depth investigation into the false assumptions and false data that has been used to further these laws and to research all the collateral damages being caused by these laws and the unconstitutional injustices that are occurring across the country. They should include these injustices in their report so the public can be better informed on what is truly happening in this country on this subject. Thank you for your time.

    ADVERTISEMENT