« Ind. Courts - "New clerk may cost Martin County" | Main | Ind. Decisions - Insurers applaud the decision by the Indiana Supreme Court to deny transfer on a case filed against the Indiana Compensation Rating Bureau (ICRB). »
Thursday, April 06, 2006
Ind. Decisions - Columnist James J. Kilpatrick features Indiana case [Updated]
An opinion piece by national columnist James J. Kilpatrick today reports on an Indiana case that I am not familiar with:
Justice never will be perfectly administered. Two cases that illustrate the truism are now pending in the [US] Supreme Court on petitions for review. They merit a sigh of regret.[Update] Thanks to Doug Masson who has sent me a link to the 7th Circuit opinion in Dawson v. Newman (8/18/05). Doug has also sent along this comment:The cases are Dawson v. Newman from Indiana and Buttrick v. United States from New Hampshire. The odds are 1,000-to-1 that the high court will reject both petitions without a public murmur of reflection, but even the lost causes are not without interest. In both cases, as I read them, defendants were wrongly treated because constables blundered.
In 1990 Lance Dawson pleaded guilty to certain unstated criminal charges. The charges could not have been very serious, for they resulted only in probation and a suspended sentence of six years in prison. In 1992 his probation officer filed a notice of probation violation, but nothing much happened and Dawson remained free to get on with his life.
Then, in 2000, the state unaccountably hauled Dawson back into court, this time before Judge Thomas Newman in the Superior Court of Madison County. In June 2000 he revoked Dawson's probation and reinstated the suspended sentence. Dawson went to prison. Thirteen months later the Indiana Court of Appeals unanimously reversed that decision: There had been a "complete failure" to prove probation violations. Dawson must be freed. [Note from ILB: Read that 2001 Court of Appeals opinion here.]
Judge Newman obediently ordered Dawson's immediate release. Someone in the judge's office faxed a copy of the court's opinion to the state Department of Corrections. Nothing happened. Dawson wasn't freed. He protested. Still nothing happened. Dawson was routinely shipped from an overcrowded prison in Indiana to an available prison in Kentucky. Fourteen months passed -- 14 months! At last he got out. Naturally he sued everyone in sight. Judge Newman pleaded immunity to suit. The other defendants said nobody ever ordered them to do anything. Now the Supreme Court will decide if the succession of blunders merits review. * * *
My guess is that neither Lance Dawson nor Dustin Buttrick will be granted a hearing before the Supremes, but at a quiet time on the Hill I wish them luck.
After skimming that opinion, I'm a bit confused by the fuss made by the columnist. The 7th Circuit approved dismissal of the judge on grounds of judicial immunity which is kind of a no brainer. It reversed the dismissal of the county clerk and the Dept. of Correction and those suits are still pending at the district level. The petition for certiorari is apparently only as to the dismissal of the judge (http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/05-1147.htm).Maybe there is an angle of which I'm unaware, but judicial immunity doesn't really seem worth making a fuss over. The real potential for liability lies with the Clerk who may have messed up the paperwork and with the DOC who may not have acted appropriately when he protested his further incarceration.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 6, 2006 01:41 PM
Posted to Indiana Decisions