155 F. Supp. 3d 758
M.D. Tenn.2015Background
- Rutherford County contracts with Pathways Community Corrections (PCC) to supervise misdemeanor probationers and collect fines, fees, and restitution; PCC reports probation violations and submits affidavits that become arrest warrants.
- PCC/probation rules make payment of supervision fees, fines, and program costs a condition of probation; many probation conditions (e.g., litter pickup, classes, drug tests) impose monetary costs that indigent probationers cannot pay.
- Probationers arrested for violations are often held on secured money bonds set without any inquiry into ability to pay; secured bonds require payment to obtain release pending revocation proceedings.
- Probationers jailed pre-revocation frequently face jailhouse pleas or long waits (30–60 days) without counsel or an indigency inquiry, prolonging detention and extending probation terms and fees.
- Plaintiffs seek a classwide preliminary injunction under the Fourteenth Amendment to enjoin jailing on secured money bonds without an indigency inquiry and to prohibit jailing when the only violation is nonpayment absent an inquiry into willfulness.
- The district court considered evidentiary submissions, denied exclusion motions, rejected Younger abstention and Rule 23 objections, and granted the preliminary injunction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Younger abstention (federal court should not enjoin) | Federal relief appropriate because the harm (pretrial-like detention without indigency inquiry) occurs before state process can remedy it; challenge is collateral to convictions | Younger applies because probationers are subject to ongoing state proceedings and can raise constitutional claims in state court | Court refused to abstain: Younger inapplicable where alleged constitutional injury (detention without indigency inquiry) occurs before an adequate state forum can address it and relief targets post-judgment procedure |
| Classwide injunctive relief without Rule 23 certification | Systemic policy (no indigency inquiry) affects all PCC probationers; injunction is appropriate on classwide basis pending merits | Plaintiffs must first certify a class under Rule 23; seeking classwide relief now improperly circumvents Rule 23 | Court allowed classwide preliminary relief under its equity powers, finding the requested injunction suited to class application |
| Use of preset secured money bonds (no indigency inquiry) | Conditioning release on payment without any indigency inquiry violates Due Process and Equal Protection; mirrors pretrial bail and Bearden/Tate principles | These precedents address pretrial or fine-only contexts and do not transfer to post-conviction probation detention | Court held Plaintiffs likely to succeed: Fourteenth Amendment requires an indigency inquiry before jailing probationers on secured money bonds because wealth-based detention is unconstitutional |
| Jailing solely for nonpayment without willfulness inquiry | Bearden requires inquiry into whether nonpayment is willful and consideration of alternatives before revoking or incarcerating for nonpayment | Defendants assert they do not jail solely for nonpayment (use ROR), so issue is moot | Court held that arrest and detention solely for nonpayment without a willfulness/indigency inquiry violates the Fourteenth Amendment; evidence showed at least some secured-bond arrests for nonpayment |
Key Cases Cited
- Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971) (federal courts ordinarily should not interfere with ongoing state criminal proceedings)
- Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 (1975) (federal injunctive relief is permissible when the state process cannot remedy pretrial detention before the harm occurs)
- Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660 (1983) (court must inquire into indigency and consider alternatives before revoking probation for nonpayment)
- Pugh v. Rainwater, 572 F.2d 1053 (5th Cir.) (1978) (use of master bond schedules that detain indigents without consideration of alternatives infringes due process and equal protection)
- Tate v. Short, 401 U.S. 395 (1971) (cannot convert a fine into a jail term solely because defendant is indigent)
- Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972) (parole revocation involves preliminary inquiry soon after arrest and a later formal hearing)
- Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (1956) (equal justice cannot depend on wealth)
- Barnett v. Hopper, 548 F.2d 550 (5th Cir.) (1977) (imprisonment for inability to pay a fine without consideration of alternatives is invalid)
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7 (2008) (standard for preliminary injunctions)