Equal Protection Claim: The Court determined that heightened scrutiny was the appropriate standard as Plaintiffs demonstrated an inability to afford bail and an absence of meaningful consideration of other possible alternatives to secured bail.
Likewise, Defendants did not demonstrate that the costs of alternatives to detention for these arrestees are greater than the costs of incarceration. Defendants presented no evidence demonstrating the injunctive relief requested will result in increased danger to the community given that these indigent arrestees are otherwise deemed eligible for release, nor that the release of these indigent arrestees will likely result in their failure to appear for court hearings. This threatened harm outweighs any harm to Defendants or to the public interest. Detention of these arrestees, who are otherwise deemed eligible for release, solely due to the inability to pay the secured bail amount on the arrest warrant can result in loss of work, separation from family, undue pressure to plead guilty, and other negative consequences. It concluded Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm-the unconstitutional deprivation of their liberty-absent the injunction. The Court found that Plaintiffs demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their constitutional claims. Defendant Giles County and the Sheriff were enjoined from detaining any person on misdemeanor probation based on a secured financial condition of release (i.e., secured bail amount) on a violation of probation if the warrant were not accompanied by a recording showing that the secured bail amount was imposed after (1) notice to the arrestee and an opportunity to be heard by an appropriate judicial officer and (2) findings by that judicial officer concerning the arrestee’s ability to pay, alternatives to secured bail, and whether pre-revocation detention is necessary to meet a compelling government interest. The District Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. They also allege that CPS and PSI’s direct pecuniary interest in the fees charged for probation violates due process and that by treating those who can immediately pay fines and fees differently from those who cannot, defendants violate equal protection. Plaintiffs allege that CPS and PSI have violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act by extorting money from plaintiffs in violation of both state and federal law. Many are forced to use disability checks, food stamps, or sell blood plasma to pay their court debts and probation fees.
#PSI PROBATION NICKI PEDIGO FULL#
Indigent probationers who are unable to pay fees in full either face revocation or extension of their probation with additional fees. A probationer who pays in full is no longer required to report to the probation company or pay additional fees. Supervised probation continues until fees are paid in full. Every person convicted in General Sessions or Circuit Court of a misdemeanor offense and assigned probation must pay either $25 or $50 weekly respectively. Probationers are subjected to invasive drug screens, repeated revocations and extensions of probation and repeated threats of jailing. The companies add their own fees and surcharges to the court debts of probationers. Community Probation Services, LLC and PSI Probation, LLC, for-profit probation companies, provide probation services for Giles County, Tennessee.
0 kommentar(er)
