Over the past few years, a Fort Wayne attorney has filed several similar lawsuits, accusing area county sheriffs of violating the constitutional rights of arrested individuals by not bringing them promptly before a judge.

In his lawsuits, Christopher Myers argues that people arrested on a weekend, particularly on a Friday evening, should not wait more than 48 hours before they are brought before a judge – a difficult standard because few courts operate on weekends.

But within weeks after Allen County Sheriff Ken Fries was sued, the county changed its policies on weekend arrests.

The lawsuits stem from a 1991 U.S. Supreme Court decision in a case from Riverside County, Calif., in which the high court established a guideline on how such arrests should be handled, setting a 48-hour time limit.

In writing for the majority, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said, “Although we hesitate to announce that the Constitution compels a specific time limit, it is important to provide some degree of certainty so that states and counties may establish procedures with confidence that they fall within constitutional bounds.”

The ruling does not establish how counties or states should deal with this issue. But the 1991 ruling says they must have some method in place to prevent a person from being locked up for more than 48 hours before a judge rules on whether there was a reason for the person’s arrest and how much the person should have to pay to be released on bond.

While some counties have made changes as a direct result of Myers’ lawsuits, others have been trying to follow the Supreme Court’s 48-hour guideline anyway.

But some officials say it can be difficult in a county with few judges.

On behalf of a handful of clients, Myers has so far sued Allen, Whitley and LaGrange counties and is asking a judge to give the lawsuit class-action status.

Myers did not return repeated calls seeking comment on his series of lawsuits.

But before those cases were filed, Myers found success in a similar case filed in 1995 against the Kosciusko County Sheriff’s Department.

Luck v. Rovenstine

In 1993, then-18-year-old Billy Luck confessed to an Indiana State Police trooper in Kosciusko County that he had been stealing.

Taken to the Kosciusko County Jail on a charge of felony theft, Luck spent four days in a holding cell and was then moved to the main part of the jail, according to court documents.

After six days, Luck brought his plight to then-Kosciusko County Sheriff Aaron Rovenstine, who released him.

At the time, the sheriff’s policy – even though sheriffs are responsible for county jails – was to not keep track of scheduled hearings for people arrested by other agencies.

Rovenstine said he didn’t want to meddle in the affairs of other agencies and was trying to avoid a “turf war,” according to court documents.

Though Luck later pleaded guilty to theft, he also sued the sheriff, alleging that his time behind bars without seeing a judge violated his constitutional right to due process.

A U.S. District Court judge ruled in favor of Rovenstine and the sheriff’s department, but the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago disagreed.

“A policy under which the sheriff holds onto a suspect until the arresting agency tells him to release the person is in violation of the Fourth Amendment,” Circuit Judge Diane Wood wrote. “We find unconvincing the sheriff’s attempt to shrug off his federal constitutional responsibilities toward detainees.”

Allen County’s plan

Allen Superior Court Judge Fran Gull cited the Luck case when she announced the criminal division’s intention to set up a new system to handle weekend arrests at the Allen County jail.

In February, LeTasha Myett had sued Allen County Sheriff Ken Fries, in his official capacity.

According to court documents, Myett was arrested and booked into the jail about 5:30 p.m. Friday, Sept. 18, and held at the jail until 9 a.m. the following Monday.

In the lawsuit, Myers said Fries failed to properly train his officers about the guidelines set by the earlier court cases.

The sheriff’s department filed a response to the lawsuit last week, admitting that Myett was held past the 48-hour limit but denying the department had a policy to violate the right to due process for people who are under arrest.

But Gull did not wait for the outcome of the lawsuit before setting up a new system to handle warrantless arrests.

In late March, she and the other criminal-division judges, as well as the magistrates and Allen Circuit Court Judge Thomas Felts, set up a schedule in which a judge or magistrate spends a few hours each weekend reviewing cases brought in Friday night, establishing whether there was a reason for the person’s arrest and setting bond.

Those who are unable to make bond over the weekend are first before the magistrates Monday morning, she said.

With the number of judges and magistrates available in Allen County’s court system, about nine people take turns on the weekend shift.

But such a setup is not available to sheriffs in smaller counties.

In other counties

Huntington County Sheriff Kent Farthing has not been sued in connection with this particular issue, but he didn’t wait for legal action.

In the jail control room, officers dump paperwork into a bin on Fridays and Saturdays when they make a warrantless arrest, Chief Deputy Tom Carney said.

The county’s two judges – Superior Court Judge Jeff Heffelfinger and Circuit Court Judge Tom Hakes – come in once on the weekend to review probable cause and set bond, Carney said.

The procedure had been standard a few years ago but at some point had fallen by the wayside. He attributes its resurrection to the spate of recent lawsuits.

Wells County Sheriff Robert Frantz said his department requires an officer making a weekend arrest to take paperwork to a judge’s home for review and a bond.

LaGrange County has taken that approach for years, even releasing inmates when they’ve been unable to get judicial review within 48 hours, Sheriff Terry Martin said.

Because the county has such a policy and has followed it, Martin is optimistic the suit Myers has filed against him will be dismissed.

Going far enough?

The 48-hour guideline has been around long enough for all law enforcement agencies to be doing it right, and the guideline merely establishes a minimal standard, Valparaiso University law professor Derrick Carter said.

“They knew all along that what they were doing, it wasn’t against the law, but no one was challenging it,” Carter said.

“I’m surprised it took this long for someone to sue about it.”

And the problem is not unique to Indiana, he said.

He sees three specific requirements for prompt action set out by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling: establishing probable cause for arrest, setting a bond amount and appointing counsel.

Carter said some of the policies in place locally may be insufficient, particularly in that they don’t involve the appointment of counsel or an actual hearing before a judge.

“It’s important in terms of what we’ve established in our Constitution and in terms of search and seizure,” Carter said. “To the extent that the Constitution enters people’s lives, they’re law-abiding, and they’re not faced with these issues. … But some people are, and usually they are poor.”

The Bill of Rights establishes how a powerful government must treat even the least member of society, he said.

“The Fourth Amendment also works on weekends,” Carter said. “That would be the heading in my case.”

rgreen@jg.net