SLIDE 1
IS YOUR CITY RUNNING A DEBTORS PRISON ? HARRIS v. CITY OF AUSTIN - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
IS YOUR CITY RUNNING A DEBTORS PRISON ? HARRIS v. CITY OF AUSTIN - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
IS YOUR CITY RUNNING A DEBTORS PRISON ? HARRIS v. CITY OF AUSTIN 42 USC 1983 ON MARCH 16, 2016, A FEDERAL COURT HELD THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS NOT BECAUSE THE RELEVANT DECISIONS WERE MADE BY A MUNICIPAL JUDGE
SLIDE 2
SLIDE 3
SLIDE 4
SLIDE 5
PLAINTIFFS SUED SEEKING CLASS ACTION
STATUS
PLAINTIFFS CLAIMED THEY “FACE THE THREAT
OF JAIL”
PLAINTIFFS RESOLVED THEIR TICKETS, AND JAIL
WAS NO LONGER A THREAT
PLAINTIFFS AMENDED TO AVOID MOOTNESS
SLIDE 6
ENTER KARIAN HARRIS 35, SINGLE, 7 KIDS, “CONTINUES TO DRIVE
TO CARE FOR HER CHILDREN”
$6K YEAR, FOOD STAMPS, SEC. 8 HOUSING,
FREE SCHOOL LUNCHES
ARRESTED & JAILED FOR TRAFFIC
TICKETS
WITHOUT AN INDIGENCY HEARING,
BEING OFFERED ALTERNATIVES TO JAIL, OR BEING APPOINTED COUNSEL
SLIDE 7
14th AMENDMENT – DUE PROCESS
failure to inquire into ability to pay, or offer alternatives to jail
14th AMENDMENT – EQUAL PROTECTION
policy of jailing for traffic tickets solely because too poor to pay fines
14th AMENDMENT – EQUAL PROTECTION
discriminatory methods of debt collection
6th AMENDMENT – RIGHT TO COUNSEL
failure to appoint counsel
SLIDE 8
THE COURT RECOGNIZED
THAT “DRIVING IS A PRIVILEGE, NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT” THAT THE SUBSTITUTION OF KARIAN HARRIS HIGHLIGHTED THE DIFFICULTY IN THE “DEFINITION OF CLASS” AND “A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT AREN’T INDIGENT . . . WILL GET IN THE CLASS” THAT THEY COULD “GO TO THE LEGISLATURE, CHANGE THE LAW, GET A SPECIAL STATUTE”
SLIDE 9
“The key question is whether the judge
was acting in a judicial role or a non- judicial role.”
“The municipal judge hearing each
individual case . . . acting in his judicial capacity makes the ultimate decisions.”
“A municipal judge’s illegal
pronouncement does not become a non- judicial act merely because it is illegal.”
SLIDE 10
AUSTIN, TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS COLORADO CITY, TEXAS FERGUSON, MISSOURI CBS FEDS
SLIDE 11
SLIDE 12
SLIDE 13
SLIDE 14
SLIDE 15
Alabama At least 4 local gov’ts Colorado Colorado Springs Georgia Dekalb County Louisiana New Orleans Michigan Macomb County Mississippi Biloxi Jackson
Missouri
Ferguson
Jennings
Tennessee
Rutherford County
Texas
Amarillo – Rule 12b6 granted
Austin – Rule 12b6 granted
El Paso
Harris County
Virginia
Alexander County
Washington
Benton County
Kennewick
SLIDE 16
SLIDE 17
SLIDE 18
Legal System must honestly examine: Fear of Law Enforcement Ignorance of the law Disparate treatment Unintended consequences Public Safety
SLIDE 19
How to balance fairness for indigent defendants and public safety?
Simultaneous calls to examine practices regarding indigent defendants and to increase traffic enforcement
102 Traffic Deaths in Austin in 2015: Highest ever recorded
“Tickets may hurt but crashes can kill”
SLIDE 20
Source: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/vision-zero-documents
SLIDE 21
Separation of Powers Judges should not be swayed by
ANYONE who favors enforcement of some laws over others…including City Councils, advocates, politicians, religious leaders, etc. etc.
SLIDE 22
Educate court staff: what are the
issues, what is the law?
Document, document, document Transparency: easily obtainable
court statistics
SLIDE 23
GOAL: work with defendants to avoid situations where they might be at risk for arrest.
Request/discuss payment plans and community service
Request that jail credit be applied to cases
Hand in late paper work
Request extensions on court orders including payment and community service plans
Show hardship or inability to complete community service
Translators available
If defendants with warrants come in voluntarily, they will not be arrested
2015: Austin Judges waived or reduced $470,406.98 in fees and fines
SLIDE 24
GOAL: prevent incarceration of indigent defendants with hardships
Texas CCP Art 45.0491 allows the waiver of fees/fines for hardships.
In custody and facing possible commitment for failure to complete previously assigned community service, and
indicates in the commitment proceeding that his or her failure was due to a hardship, a
judge may immediately release that defendant to appear at a weekly hardship docket.
defendants may provide any documentation they might have and discuss their situation so that a judge can determine if waiver is appropriate
SLIDE 25
Looking to other jurisdictions for solutions
SLIDE 26
SLIDE 27
SLIDE 28
SLIDE 29