Miscellaneous, including suits against Drug Court Team Members
George v. City of White Plains, N.Y.
George v. City of White Plains, N.Y., No.210-CV-10457 (S.D. New York, July 18, 2022).
The Court dismissed a drug court participant’s complaint alleging that the Judge violated his constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. The Court found that the Judge has absolute immunity for suit for damages for any actions taken within the scope of their judicial responsibilities.
United States v. Freeman
United States v. Freeman, 992 F.3d 268, 274 (4th Cir. 2021)
In an unprecedented decision, 4th Circuit holds within guidelines sentence for prescription-addicted opiate pill seller was unreasonable.
Sturkin v. Patrick
Sturkin v. Patrick, No. 3:16-CV-434-CWR-FKB, 2019 WL 2078790 (S.D. Miss. May 10, 2019)
Plaintiff, former drug court client awarded over $69,000 in attorney fees in addition to the $350,000 jury verdict because of harassment by her Drug Court Parole Officer.
Lavite v. Dunstan
Lavite v. Dunstan, No. 16-CV-882-DRH-RJD, 2018 WL 5437717 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 29, 2018), aff’d, 932 F.3d 1020 (7th Cir. 2019)
Denying summary judgment motion, in large part, in suit against county and sheriff, brought by decorated vet, who formed Veterans Treatment Court, when he had a PTSD incident and was then barred from county buildings.
Hoffman v. Knoebel
Hoffman v. Knoebel, No. 414CV00012SEBTAB, 2017 WL 3191198 (S.D. Ind. July 27, 2017), aff’d, 894 F.3d 836 (7th Cir. 2018)
Dismissing claims against sheriff and drug court employees but observing: “ In conclusion, we acknowledge Plaintiffs’ pervasive, palpable frustration in waging this legal assault, which feeling arises out of their inability to overcome the central obstacle to their success, that is, the fact that the primary tortfeasor responsible for their constitutional deprivations was Clark Circuit Court Judge Jerome Jacobi acting in his role as the presiding judge of the Drug Treatment Court……. In appropriate cases, state actors, including judges, may be subject to suit for prospective injunctive relief to enjoin their future unconstitutional practices from being committed in their official capacities.
Pulliam v. Allen
Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522 (1984)
This avenue of relief typically is available to a person confined by a state who seeks to challenge the fact or duration of his confinement. Here, however, such remedies are not available because, following the reports of due process violations to the Indiana Judicial Center, the DTC was decertified, the remaining participants were allowed to complete the Program under the guidance of Chief Judge Carmichael, Judge Jacobi was removed from office (along with several members of his staff), and the operations of the problem-solving court officially ended in June 2015.
S.M. v. Lincoln County
S.M. v. Lincoln Cnty., 874 F.3d 581 (8th Cir. 2017)
Affirming substantial verdict against County for failure to supervise drug court tracker who was sexually assaulting drug court participants and whose job involved monitoring drug court participants by home visits and other supervision tools.
Carlisle v. Normand
Carlisle v. Normand, No. CV 16-3767, 2018 WL 3474715 (E.D. La. July 19, 2018)
§ 1983 Civil Rights claim based on allegations that Drug Court violated their constitutional rights by imprisoning them without due process, in the form of probation sanctions, contempt convictions, and time spent waiting dismissed because under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994)–a defendant may not impugn a state sentence unless the sentence has already been invalidated.