Home » Legislature & Courts » Briefs and Complaints » Voting Briefs and Complaints
Judgment in Voting Rights Lawsuit Against Florida Department of Corrections
(Submitted to Judge P. Kevin Davey on July 22, 2003)
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA
GENERAL JURISDICTION
FLORIDA CAUCUS OF BLACK STATE LEGISLATORS, INC. d/b/a
FLORIDA CONFERENCE OF BLACK STATE LEGISLATORS, PEOPLE
UNITED TO LEAD THE STRUGGLE)FOR EQUALITY, INC., BROTHERS
OF THE SAME MIND, INC.,INNER CITY GRASSROOTS CIVIC
COALITION, INC., and REGINALD GREENLEE, JOSEPH BROWN,
MILTON MCCLOUD, HOLLIS HORTON, on behalf of themselves and classes
of others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v. Case No. 01-659
JAMES CROSBY, in his in his official capacity as Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections,
Defendant
_______________________
FINAL JUDGMENT
This cause came on for hearing on August 15, 2002, on the parties' cross motions for summary judgment and Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Writ of Mandamus. An order was thereafter entered on August 27, 2002, dismissing Plaintiffs' Petition for a Writ of Mandamus, granting in part and denying in part Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgement, denying in part Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment, and reserving jurisdiction on remaining issues. A subsequent hearing was held on the remaining issues on October 22, 2002 and continued on October 28, 2002, at which time the Court considered the parties' proposals to remedy Defendant's failures to assist as many as approximately 124,769 offenders (hereinafter "the offenders") who may not have received assistance for restoration of their civil rights pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 944.293 prior to their release from prison or supervision. A final status conference occurred on , 2003, by which time Defendant had submitted two written reports to the Court of remedial activity since the October 28, 2002, hearing.
The Court having considered the parties' submissions and having heard argument of counsel, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, now enters final judgment, and
DETERMINES AND FINDS as follows:
1. The relief to which Plaintiffs are entitled is to correct the failures of the Defendant to provide restoration of civil rights assistance pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 944.293 to offenders who were released from prison or supervision during the period of approximately 1992 until 2001.
2. The final relief for the offenders who were released from prison or supervision during the period of 1992 until 2001 for whom the defendant failed to provide restoration of civil rights assistance pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 944.293 shall be as set forth in paragraphs four (4), five (5), six (6), and (7) of this Final Judgment.
3. Defendant has loaned eight (8) staff persons and computers to the Florida Parole Commission's Office of Clemency (hereinafter "the Office") for the purpose of assisting the Office in the screening of offenders who did not receive restoration of their civil rights assistance pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 944.293 prior to their release from prison or supervision.
4. Defendant is aiding in the Office's determination of whether these offenders qualify to have their civil rights restored without a hearing and to provide the necessary application form to those offenders who must have a hearing. The Defendant has electronically sent the names and other vital information to the Office so this determination can be promptly made. After review by the Office, notices of ineligibility for restoration without a hearing and an application for restoration with a hearing (Form ADM 1501A) will be mailed after the determination of non eligibility for restoration without a hearing was made. See attached sample letter of October 25, 2002 signed by Carolyn Tibbets, Director, Office of Clemency Administrations, Florida Parole Commission.
5. The Defendant will assist the Office, after approval by the Board of Executive Clemency, with mailings so advising those offenders whose civil rights were restored without a hearing.
6. The Defendant, on behalf of the Office, used the most current addresses utilizing data from the Department of Motor Vehicles or, if necessary, data from the Internal Revenue Service or a private company with access to various databases used for locating a person's most current address. The Defendant's staff has used a class of mail service that will ensure the return to the Defendant of all mail which is determined by the U.S. Post Office to be undeliverable. All notices returned the Defendant as undeliverable are to be retained for possible further analysis.
7. The Defendant estimates that if the last quarterly submission reflects the rate at which this pool is screened, it could take an additional 12 months to complete the screening of the offenders.
8. Prior to the approximate date of completion of the screening of the offenders, the parties shall have drafted a joint PSA, and compiled a list of media in the affected areas of the State to whom the PSA is to be directed. After the screening of the offfenders is completed, the Defendant, on behalf of the Office, shall send a printed Public Service Announcement (PSA) to relevant media concerning the process for the restoration of civil rights. The PSA will include a toll free telephone number, Defendant's address, and a state agency web site where the application form for the restoration of civil rights with a hearing can be obtained.
9. If the parties can not agree on a joint PSA submission and list of media in the affected areas to whom the PSA is to be sent, the parties shall submit to the Court their respective versions of the PSA and media mailing list, and the Court shall determine the final version of the PSA to be used and the list of media to whom the Defendant shall mail the PSA.
10. The Defendant is directed to retain all notices which are returned as undeliverable by the U.S. Postal Service so the parties and the Court can determine where the PSAs should best be focused for dissemination.
11. Either party may schedule and notice a hearing on implementation details of this remedial phase if deemed necessary. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over the remedial phase of this lawsuit until completed and to determine the awarding of taxable costs to the Plaintiffs.
DONE and ORDERED in chambers in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida this day July, 2003.
P. Kevin Davey
Circuit Court Judge
Copies to:
Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq.
Randall Marshall, Esq.
Charles Elsesser, Esq.
JoNel Newman, Esq.
James Peters, Esq.
