Feenstra v. Sigler, Case No. 19-CV-00234-GKF-FHM
| Decision Date | 13 November 2019 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 19-CV-00234-GKF-FHM |
| Parties | AMANDA FEENSTRA, SHARONICA CARTER, and LONNIE FEENSTRA, Plaintiffs, v. JARED SIGLER, Special Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity; JOHN GERKIN, Special Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity; CURTIS DELAPP, former Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity; OKLAHOMA INDIGENT DEFENSE SYSTEM, an Oklahoma State Agency; STATE OF OKLAHOMA ex rel. OKLAHOMA INDIGENT DEFENSE SYSTEM; CRAIG SUTTER, Executive Director of the Oklahoma Indigent Defense System; and OKLAHOMA INDIGENT DEFENSE SYSTEM BOARD OF DIRECTORS, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Oklahoma |
This matter comes before the court on the Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 10] of defendants Jared Sigler, Special Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity; John Gerkin, Special Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity; and Curtis DeLapp, former Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity. The court conducted a hearing on the motion on October 10, 2019. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Since at least Magna Carta in 1215, Anglo-American law has reflected a deeply rooted concern regarding the imposition of penal fines. See generally Timbs v. Indiana, — U.S. —, 139 S. Ct. 682 (2019) (). Although painted against the backdrop of that jurisprudence, this motion requires the court to contend only with a single, discrete issue: the procedures employed by three judges of Washington County, Oklahoma with regard to fines, fees, and costs arising from criminal charges filed against the three individual plaintiffs—Amanda Feenstra, Sharonica Carter, and Lonnie Feenstra.
Plaintiffs generally allege that defendants Jared Sigler, Special Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity; John Gerkin, Special Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity; Curtis DeLapp, former Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity (collectively, "Judicial Defendants") "have systemically failed to conduct an inquiry into criminal defendants' ability to pay either before imposing those fines and fees at sentencing, or before sanctioning indigent defendants for non-payment—including by incarceration." [Doc. 3-1, ¶ 10]. Plaintiffs initiated this case in the District Court in and for Washington County, asserting seven (7) separate claims: (1) failure to provide notice and opportunity to be heard prior to arrest and detention in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Sigler; (2) punishment solely on the basis of poverty in violation of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Sigler and DeLapp; (3) denial of the right to counsel in violation of the assistance of counsel clause of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment in the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the four Oklahoma Indigent Defense System defendants; (4) denialof due process in violation of article 2, § 7 of the Oklahoma Constitution against Sigler and DeLapp; (5) failure to provide relief due to poverty and disability in violation of OKLA. STAT., tit. 22, ch. 18, Rule 8.5 against Sigler and DeLapp; (6) failure to conduct ability to pay hearings prior to incarceration for nonpayment in violation of OKLA. STAT., tit. 22, ch. 18, Rule 8.4 against Sigler and DeLapp; and (7) failure to conduct ability to pay hearings at judgment and sentencing in violation of OKLA. STAT., tit. 22, ch. 18, Rule 8.1 against DeLapp, Sigler, and defendant John Gerkin, Special Judge of the District Court of Washington County, in his official capacity. Defendants the State of Oklahoma ex rel. Oklahoma Indigent Defense System; the State of Oklahoma Indigent Defense System; Craig Sutter, Executive Director of the Oklahoma Indigent Defense System; and the State of Oklahoma Indigent Defense System Board of Directors (collectively, "OIDS Defendants") removed the case to this court on May 3, 2019 pursuant to the court's federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1331. [Doc. 3]. The Judicial Defendants then filed their motion to dismiss, seeking dismissal of all claims asserted against them.1 [Doc. 10]. The motion is ripe for the court's decision.
The Complaint's factual allegations arise from three separate, but related, courses of conduct: (1) the imposition of fines, fees, and costs at sentencing, (2) appearances at the "cost docket," and (3) incarceration for failure to pay outstanding fines, fees, and costs.
First, with respect to sentencing, plaintiffs allege that, in Washington County, no ability-to-pay inquiry is made as to a criminal defendant's ability to pay fines, fees, and costs at the time of sentencing as required by Oklahoma Rule of Criminal Procedure Rule 8.1. [Doc. 3-1, ¶ 36]. Instead, plaintiffs allege that, after sentencing, while setting up a payment plan as to those fines and fees already imposed, Washington County criminal defendants are required to complete a "Rule 8" Form. [Id.]; see also [id. ¶ 14]. The form contains no questions about the defendants' income, expenses, or ability to pay. [Id. ¶ 14].
Second, after sentencing, criminal defendants in Washington County are ordered to appear at the "cost docket," in which a judge is supposed to oversee the payment of fines, fees, and costs in a manner consistent with the federal and Oklahoma Constitutions, as well as the governing rules of the court. [Id. ¶ 15]. Special Judge Sigler has overseen the cost docket in Washington County for several years, and currently presides over the docket. [Id. ¶¶ 15, 41]. At the cost docket, debtors do not receive any "meaningful inquiry" into their ability to pay. [Id. ¶ 41]. Instead, requests to reduce monthly payments are often denied, and Special Judge Sigler allegedly instructs debtors to make same-day payments or be sent to jail. [Id. ¶ 15].
Third, at the "cost docket," Special Judge Sigler allegedly uses a form document, entitled "Order Remanding Defendant to Jail for Failure to Pay Fines and Costs," that contains a predetermined conclusion that "the Defendant has willfully refused or neglected to pay the amounts . . . previously ordered." [Id. ¶ 41]. Moreover, allegedly, the space for "findings of fact[] and conclusions of law" is typically left blank "(or contains, at most, a note about the date of a missed or upcoming court appearance or the total amount owed)." [Id.].
The Complaint also includes specific factual allegations as to each plaintiff, which are set forth below:
Allegations as to Amanda Feenstra
Amanda Feenstra is a thirty-three-year-old resident of Claremore, Oklahoma. [Id. ¶ 20]. In April 2015, Feenstra pleaded guilty to false personation, forgery, identity theft, and conspiracy charges in Washington County. Former Judge DeLapp ordered Feenstra to pay over $3,000 in fines, fees, and costs, without conducting an inquiry into her ability to pay. [Id.]. At the time, Feenstra was unemployed and suffering from a drug addiction. At sentencing, Feenstra advised former Judge DeLapp that she would be unable to make the payments, either immediately or upon her release from jail. [Id. ¶ 38]. Former Judge DeLapp did not suspend or vacate her payments, but informed her that she could work one month per day at the courthouse to satisfy her obligations. [Id.].
On February 2, 2017, less than two weeks after her release from prison, Special Judge Sigler ordered Feenstra to pay $50 per month towards her fines, fees, and costs. Special Judge Sigler allegedly never asked Feenstra about her salary, bills, and expenses, and refused to honor former Judge DeLapp's statement at sentencing that she could work one month per day at the courthouse to satisfy her obligations. [Id. ¶ 43]. Feenstra informed Special Judge Sigler of her indigency and inability to make her payments. [Id.].
On May 7, 2018, Special Sigler issued a warrant for Feenstra's arrest based on Feenstra's failure to make monthly payments. Feenstra alleges that, prior to the issuance of the warrant, Special Judge Sigler failed to provide Feenstra "an opportunity to be heard as to the refusal or neglect to pay the installment when due" as required by OKLA. STAT. tit. 22, ch. 18, R. 8.4, or inquire into her ability to pay. [Id. ¶ 47]. In the second week of May 2018, during a call with the Washington County Court Clerk to confirm her next cost docket appearance, Feenstra was informed by the Court Clerk that she had mixed up her dates, missed the cost docket, and wastherefore subject to an active warrant for her arrest. [Id. ¶ 48]. Feenstra was told that if she came to the courthouse to reschedule her appearance, the warrant would be recalled. Feenstra immediately went to the courthouse and met with Special Judge Sigler in his chambers. Sigler said that she owed an additional $40 and refused to reschedule the appearance until after the following day's arraignment docket. [Id.].
While Feenstra was meeting with Special Judge Sigler, the Court Clerk's office notified police that Feenstra was at the courthouse and she was arrested. Feenstra did not receive the opportunity to be heard prior to her incarceration pursuant to Rule 8.4, and spent the night in jail. [Id.]. The following day, Special Judge Sigler informed Feenstra that she could either pay $330 immediately or remain in jail. Plaintiff Lonnie Feenstra was forced to borrow $330 in order to make the payment. [Id.].
Feenstra currently owes almost $11,800.00 in court-ordered fines, fees, and costs, more than...
To continue reading
Request your trial