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

  • 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. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT