Federal judge rejects Spokane County’s motions for reconsideration in jail bookings fee case.
Federal District Court Judge Fred Van Sickle has denied Spokane County’s requests that he reconsider recent rulings against the county in a high-stakes due process case involving the collection of booking fees at the Spokane County jail. The plaintiff is Shawn Huss of Spokane who is represented by the Center for Justice.
The case has its roots in Huss’s October 2004 arrest on a domestic violence charge when Huss’s wallet and all his money was seized at the time he was booked into the Spokane County jail. Even though Huss was released, his (now empty) wallet returned and the charge dropped the next day, it took four months and a letter from a CFJ attorney to get Huss’s money back from the County. The Center also filed suit on Huss’s behalf, arguing that the state law and county policy authorizing the automatic seizure of money without an opportunity for Huss and other inmates to contest the seizure violated Constitutional due process protections.
In August 2006 Judge Van Sickle agreed, finding that the state law and the booking fee practice at the Spokane County jail were “facially unconstitutional.” Fourteen months later, Judge Van Sickle also determined that the County was financially liable “because the Jail’s booking fee policy deprived [Huss] and others similarly situated, of property without due process of law.” Then, in August of this year, the Judge granted a motion for class certification, setting the stage for a class action lawsuit in which Huss would serve as the class representative.
It was in response to this most recent ruling [click here to link to the September 4, 2008 Spokesman-Review article about the decision] that the County filed its motions for reconsideration. At the time, CFJ attorney Breean Beggs estimated that the County’s total liability for the class action suit would exceed $1 million, accounting for continually accruing interest on the estimated $760,000 that would have been improperly seized by jail officials. One key controversy in the case is whether the county should be liable for booking fees seized from inmates who were later convicted. By his August 25th ruling, Judge Van Sickle ruled that the class of plaintiffs should include all inmates processed between May 5, 2004 and December 20, 2006, the period during which the constitutionally flawed fee collection process was in effect.
The case has its roots in Huss’s October 2004 arrest on a domestic violence charge when Huss’s wallet and all his money was seized as he was booked into the Spokane County jail. The charge was quickly dropped, the wallet returned, but the County kept the money for several months.
While rejecting the motions for reconsideration, Judge Van Sickle did grant the County’s request that he certify an interlocutory review by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on the issues raised in the County’s motions for reconsideration. Concurrently, and as is standard, Judge Van Sickle has stayed further activity in the case, pending review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
“In this order,” says Beggs, “the federal district court puts to rest once and for all the County’s argument that it should be relieved of liability for taking people’s money without a hearing. The County had argued with its first attorney and now re-argued with its new attorney that by starting to give notice in January of 2005 of their illegal seizures, that somehow cured the violation of rights in failing to provide a pre-seizure hearing. The trial court also rejected the remarkable argument that even if the county’s forcible seizure of funds was illegal, it could be excused if a prisoner was later convicted for unrelated charges.”
“Finally,” Beggs added, “the trial court certified the issue of expedited appellate review. Pre-judgment interest and attorney fees continue to accrue which will test an already weak county budget situation. Hopefully, the Commissioners having been called to account twice with different lawyers will consider repaying the money that they illegally seized from their
citizens.”
No comments yet.