Jury clears Ravalli County in class-action suit that said it violated poor residents’ due process

MISSOULA — A jury found Thursday the Ravalli County pretrial program was not violating the due process rights of indigent clients as alleged in a federal class-action lawsuit.

In Leonard et al vs. Ravalli County, witnesses who had been part of the program said they only learned of the costs for services, such as urinalysis, once they enrolled, the fees were exorbitant, and they had no chance to appeal them.

In some cases, clients in the program paid more than their rent or the bulk of a Social Security check, often $350 a month, even more than $1,000 at times, with no inkling of how long the payments would last.

The program is run by the Sheriff’s Office, and in testimony, Sheriff Stephen Holton and his team argued they offered leniency to defendants enrolled in the program. But the trial also showed many people can’t afford the costs.

After the verdict, Holton said affordability is always a consideration and has been since the beginning of the program, 2018.

“It’s always a work in progress to lower the fees as much as we possibly can,” Holton said. “That’s that’s the way it’s been since the day we started it, and we’re going to continue to do that.”

Lawyer Phil Telfeyan, who argued on behalf of the plaintiffs, said the team will almost certainly appeal, although they won’t necessarily have insight into the thinking of the jurors.

“It’s always an uphill battle when you’re fighting on behalf of people against the government,” said Telfeyan, with Equal Justice Under Law. “So we put forth the best case that we could, and obviously the jury didn’t see the unfairness of the system.”

In closing arguments, Telfeyan said Ravalli County was getting “blood out of a turnip” by threatening jail time to people enrolled in the program.

When judges order conditions of release, people accused of crimes enroll in the pretrial program for things like drug testing, but the judges don’t set the fees or control them; they only set the conditions.

The plaintiffs argued the system wasn’t fair because it never gave them a chance to be heard on the affordability of the fees. Some pleaded guilty to avoid the fees, because probation was significantly cheaper.

A couple of witnesses said they were living in their cars in part because of the steep fees.

“They squeezed money out of some of the poorest people you’ve probably met just to get those pretrial fees,” Telfeyan said.

Equal Justice Under Law out of Washington, D.C., and the Bechtold firm of Missoula represented the plaintiffs.

The jury also denied the fees three named plaintiffs had requested and found the county had not violated their due process rights. Richard Churchill had asked for $825, Keith Leonard for $1,174 and Daniel O’Toole for $3,550.

Judge Dana Christensen earlier dismissed a wrongful imprisonment claim in the lawsuit.

In closing arguments on behalf of Ravalli County, lawyer Mitchell Young said if defendants in the program were displeased with the fees associated with their conditions of release, they could ask a judge to change the conditions.

He also said people have a right to a process, but not to their preferred outcome, and he said some of the defendants’ complaints were better directed at the state, not Ravalli County.

“The county doesn’t violate people’s due process rights,” Young said. “The county has kind of bent over backwards to make sure that they have them.”

Lawyers for Ravalli County, with County Litigation Group, showed witnesses for the plaintiffs had multiple encounters with law enforcement, some misstated the fees they paid to the program, and some were homeless because they had been violent or uncooperative with a landlord — arguments Telfeyan said were a distraction from the rights everyone has to due process.

Plus, Young said, the program is flexible when it comes to fees, and even the pretrial program supervisor reminded officers in an email to charge people for services instead of giving out freebies.

“That email got sent because they were letting too many people test without paying,” Young said.

In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs represented indigent people in Ravalli County who enrolled in the program, and Telfeyan said their fates remain with the county.

“At this point, it’s in the hands of the sheriff,” Telfeyan said.