Court OKs Inmates’ Suit

A federal appellate panel ruled Friday that three former inmates held in Los Angeles County Jail for as long as 29 1/2 hours beyond their ordered releases are entitled to their day in court.

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a judge’s dismissal of their claims and ordered that a jury be allowed to decide whether the constitutional rights of the former inmates were violated by their prolonged incarceration.

The ruling comes three years after county supervisors agreed to pay $27 million to settle five class-action lawsuits that alleged, among other things, that thousands of inmates were routinely held for a few extra days because of the time it took to process their court-ordered releases.

In this case, plaintiffs accuse Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca of “deliberate indifference” to their constitutional rights by following a policy “that simply delays all releases until the system, in its sweet time, and with the resources it chooses ... is ready to make releases.”

Lawyers for Baca, according to the appellate opinion, conceded that county policies guiding the release of inmates resulted in delays. They argued that those delays are necessary to complete lengthy administrative release procedures.

But the court focused on a single issue of disputed fact: whether the delays were reasonably justified.

“Based on the county’s declarations, a juror could find that its explanations reasonably justify a 24-hour delay in release from jail. On the other hand, a juror could find that the time each necessary administrative task reasonably requires simply does not add up to the 29 hours,” Judge Dorothy W. Nelson wrote for the three-member panel.

Depending on the outcome, the county may be held liable for “continuing to adhere to a policy that it knew resulted in unlawful detentions without reasonable cause,” she wrote.

The court said jurors must consider evidence, including the administrative processes and the volume of bookings and releases, in making that determination.

U.S. District Court Judge Dean D. Pregerson threw out the case before trial last year, after finding that the county’s challenged policies, as a matter of law, did not violate the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs.

Attorneys Stephen Yagman, who represents the plaintiffs, and Michael D. Allan, who represents the sheriff, did not return calls Friday. Baca’s spokesman, Steve Whitmore, declined to comment on the allegations until they are resolved.