Harris County has been sued in federal court for the third time in less than a year for yet another issue related to the county’s tough arrest and pretrial detention practices.
This time, civil rights advocates allege that county officials routinely charge and jail thousands of people each month without a warrant and without ever requiring police officers to supply sworn statements taken under oath that adequately describe the crimes for which the defendants stand accused, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday in the Southern District of Texas.
The plaintiffs are a pair of non-violent offenders arrested and jailed over the Christmas holidays.
Lucas Lomas was arrested Christmas Eve for allegedly pilfering “five DVDs and a speaker,” according to a document prepared by a prosecutor and co-signed by an officer. The filing provides no details about how the arresting officer determined Lomas had stolen the items. After a video hearing that is typical in Harris County, a hearing officer found probable cause. Lomas was released after posting $15,000 bail.
Carlos Eaglin was arrested Dec. 26 for alleged possession of less than 2 ounces of marijuana. Court papers co-signed by an officer and prosecutor accuse Eaglin of marijuana possession, but do not indicate a statement from the officer about how the substance was discovered or determined to be marijuana. After his video hearing, Eaglin was jailed on a $5,000 bond – the highest amount specified for any misdemeanor in Harris County’s so-called bond schedule. He remains in jail.
The lawsuit seeks to compel the county to provide all arrestees with a more detailed statements of facts that are supported by an oath or information provided by a police officer that is consistent with both state and federal law. Those documents then could be reviewed by what the case describes as a neutral magistrate.
You can see a copy of the complaint here. The other two lawsuits are about bail practices and detention time, with the city being the defendant in the latter case. I Am Not A Lawyer, but what the plaintiffs are asking for in this action sure seems like a reasonable thing to me. As with the other lawsuit, incoming DA Kim Ogg will have to decide how she wants to handle this.
“The lawsuit seeks to compel the county to provide all arrestees with a more detailed statements of facts that are supported by an oath or information provided by a police officer that is consistent with both state and federal law. Those documents then could be reviewed by what the case describes as a neutral magistrate.”
My guess is this lawsuit should be tossed because they don’t have standing to sue for all future criminals who get arrested. This type of lawsuit is a poster child for lawsuit abuse legislation.
Heck, it would be nice of the charging instruments were required to specify which statute was violated, instead of generic language describing the offense.