Troubled Clark County Drug Court suspended

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Claims that drug court participants in Clark County were jailed for months without cause and subjected to unauthorized searches and arrests by drug court staff have led the Indiana Judicial Center to suspend the problem-solving court in Jeffersonville.

Judicial Center Executive Director Jane A. Seigel on Feb. 14 said in a letter to Clark Circuit Judge Jerry Jacobi that the drug treatment court he oversees was suspended immediately, citing “allegations of unlawful conduct by drug court staff and drug court practices harmful to participants. Regretfully, the seriousness of these allegations necessitates an immediate suspension of Clark County Drug Court operations,” Seigel wrote.

Attorneys familiar with the court expressed concern that problems were significant enough that the program could be ended. Multiple participants were held in the Clark County Jail for months without a hearing or representation of counsel; several were freed in late January after a deputy prosecutor discovered the lengthy detentions.

The Judicial Center has barred the court from accepting new participants and asked Jacobi to submit a list of current participants within 10 days “and requests that you work with our office to develop a plan for the future supervision of each of these individuals.”

Meanwhile, eight plaintiffs alleging federal civil-rights violations have sued Jacobi and numerous court and county officials in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, New Albany. The suit filed Tuesday also seeks a to establish a class action for drug court participants who were jailed more than 72 hours without a hearing or due process, or were arrested by state actors lacking arrest powers.

The suit alleges four defendants were held more than 60 days without due process, including Destiny Hoffman, who was held 154 days on an initial order of a 48-hour detention. A fifth defendant allegedly was held 30 days without due process.

The suit also alleges that former drug court staff members arrived at a participant’s home last August around midnight and one staff member pointed a firearm at a resident before placing the program participant in handcuffs and taking her to jail.




Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. So men who think they are girls at heart can use the lady's potty? Usually the longer line is for the women's loo, so, the ladies may be the ones to experience temporary gender dysphoria, who knows? Is it ok to joke about his or is that hate? I may need a brainwash too, hey! I may just object to my own comment, later, if I get myself properly "oriented"

  2. Heritage, what Heritage? The New Age is dawning .... an experiment in disordered liberty and social fragmentation is upon us .... "Carmel City Council approved a human rights ordinance with a 4-3 vote Monday night after hearing about two hours of divided public testimony. The ordinance bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, among other traits. Council members Rick Sharp, Carol Schleif, Sue Finkam and Ron Carter voted in favor of it. The three council members opposing it—Luci Snyder, Kevin Rider and Eric Seidensticker—all said they were against any form of discrimination, but had issues with the wording and possible unintended consequences of the proposal." Kardashian is the new Black.

  3. Can anyone please tell me if anyone is appealing the law that certain sex offenders can't be on school property. How is somebody supposed to watch their children's sports games or graduations, this law needs revised such as sex offenders that are on school property must have another non-offender adult with them at all times while on school property. That they must go to the event and then leave directly afterwards. This is only going to hurt the children of the offenders and the father/ son mother/ daughter vice versa relationship. Please email me and let me know if there is a group that is appealing this for reasons other than voting and religion. Thank you.

  4. Should any attorney who argues against the abortion industry, or presents arguments based upon the Founders' concept of Higher Law, (like that marriage precedes the State) have to check in with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program for a mandatory mental health review? Some think so ... that could certainly cut down on cases such as this "cluttering up" the SCOTUS docket ... use JLAP to deny all uber conservative attorneys licenses and uber conservative representation will tank. If the ends justify the means, why not?

  5. Tell them sherry Mckay told you to call, they're trying to get all the people that have been wronged and held unlawfully to sign up on this class action lawsuit.