The Professional Bondsmen of Texas- Blog

The United States Supreme Court denied the petition for cert. filed by the plaintiffs in Daves v. Dallas County in January.  In February, the United States Supreme Court filed another petition for cert. filed in Little v. Doguet from Louisiana on a similar issue.  Therefore, the Daves v. Dallas County case has finally been concluded.  On this episode of The Bail Post we discuss the legacy of this case and the other important case called ODonnell v. Harris County.  Audio Podcast-   Also available on: Apple Podcasts-            CLICK HERE Spotify-                        CLICK HERE Google Podcasts-        CLICK HERE Podcast Index-            CLICK HERE Amazon Music-          CLICK HERE Stitcher-            ...

U.S. Supreme Court Denied Cert. Allowing Fifth Circuit to End Federal Micromanagement of Ongoing State Criminal Cases by Ken W. Good In the labyrinth of legal battles waged in the expansive landscape of Texas, the saga of Daves v. Dallas County unfolded with deceptive simplicity. Initially framed as a straightforward confrontation between plaintiffs and the legal machinery of Dallas County, this saga eventually evolved into a convoluted odyssey involving constitutional interpretations, initial rulings that were later reversed and other judicial intricacies. What was supposed to be simple turned out to be anything but. To understand this litigation, a review must go all the way back to 2016. A group of plaintiffs brought suit against misdemeanor judges, the Harris County sheriff and Harris County in ODonnell v. Harris County, alleging violations of due process and equal protection. By 2017, Judge Lee Rosenthal of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas issued a prelim...

  On January 5, 2024, the United States Supreme Court of the United States held a conference on the petition for cert. filed in Daves v. Dallas County .   The petition for cert. raised two issues.  The first was abstention.  The Younger Abstention Doctrine  holds that federal courts should abstain from cases that are pending in state proceedings.  The federal appellate courts have suggested that the federal courts should not  attempt to "micromanage" ongoing criminal cases pending in the state courts.   This argument would seem to apply even more to this litigation.  Once the Fifth Circuit held that judges could not be sued in these types of lawsuits, the analysis should have been even more in favor of not getting involved in this type of litigation.  Since the judges are not proper parties, then why would plaintiffs be allowed to still sue, going around the judges, by suing only the county and the sheriff?  The Fifth Circ...

On Episode No. 45 on The Bail Post, we discuss a debate that we recently participated in against a representative of Civil Rights Corps.  This is the organization that has filed bail reform and criminal justice reform litigation across the United States.  This organization filed all of the cases in Texas that made their way to the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.  These cases include:   ODonnell v. Harris County ,  Daves v. Dallas County ,  Russell v. Harris County  and  Booth v. Galveston County . This group has raised tens of millions of dollars from donors to fund these cases.   We discuss our preparation for the debate and our expectations.  We also talk about the heated and we mean very heated debate that took place and the toxic language that Civil Rights Corps uses.  We also talk about our take away from the debate and whether there can be any common ground found when Civil Rights Corps cannot agree on...

Attorney At Law Magazine Article by Ken W. Good  For the past year, veteran court watchers have been eagerly waiting for the other shoe to drop with the second en banc opinion in Daves v. Dallas County pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. In January 2022, the court issued the first en banc opinion, Daves I, which held that both county court judges and district court judges were state actors who could not be sued in federal court pursuant to 42 USC §l983 (which reversed a ruling to the contrary in ODonnell I) regarding possible federal oversight of ongoing criminal cases including setting bail. In an unusual move, the Fifth Circuit remanded the case for the trial court to make certain findings, but retained jurisdiction for final disposition of the case en banc. On March 31, the court issued its second and final en banc decision in Daves II. The ruling was stunning while entirely logical, with its impact certain to reverberate for years. To have a...

Former attorney John O'Neill speaks out on the Fifth Circuit's  decision in the Daves' case which concludes that ODonnell should never have been file in federal court.  The ODonnell case was the last case Mr. O'Neill tried in his career.  He speaks about how the case came about and how he believes Judge Rosenthal lost her way on the case.  O'Neill also highlights how Harris County was one of the safest of the large counties in the country at the time and is now one of the large counties with the most crime. To see more  CLICK HERE .

I. Introduction In the last few years, there have been proposals for bail reform across the United States.  In some states, when the reform sought at the state legislature did not appear likely, litigation was initiated to attempt to force reforms.  In Texas, litigation was initiated in Harris County entitled ODonnell v. Harris County alleging that misdemeanor bail practices violated procedural due process.  Even though judges normally cannot be sued under 42 USC 1983, the plaintiffs argued that county court judges were acting as county policy makers when they adopted a bail schedule.  The district court agreed and refused to dismiss the case.  Additionally, the trial court denied a motion to dismiss based upon the doctrine of abstention.  Thereafter, the district court held that Harris County's misdemeanor practices violated the constitution and entered a preliminary injunction.  The injunction was reversed.  ( ODonnell I) .  The district c...

Shocking News.  The Fifth Circuit handed down the long awaited opinion in the Daves case today.  The court starts the opinion by stating the following: "In a second round of en banc review, we conclude that this case, whose aim was to revise by federal decree the Texas state court pocedures for felony and misdemenaor pretrial bail, should neer have been brought in federal court." This is the second en banc decision handed down by the 5th Circuit in the case.  The court remands the case with instructions to DISMISS. The court holds that the trial court should have abstained from hearing the case. To see the opinion CLICK HERE . This is a rapidly moving story.  More to follow. Impressions- ODonnell should never have been filed.  The county has spent over $100 million to implement a settlement that the trial court  How does this impact the Russell v. Harris County case pending in federal court in Houston? How does this impact the Booth v. Galveston County case...

  Shannon Daves, a transgender woman, was homeless when Dallas police officers arrested her for an alleged misdemeanor in January 2018. (It’s not clear from court documents what she'd been charged with.) Four years later, her case could have dire consequences for those fighting for bail reform in Texas and around the country. At the time, the police officers brought her to Dallas County Jail, where she waited in a holding cell for several hours before jailers herded her and 10 other detainees out of their cells to face a judge. “The judge told me that I would have to pay $500 to be released from jail,” Daves said during sworn court testimony. She went on to claim the judge "did not ask me if I could afford to pay that much money." Daves had been unemployed for a while before she was arrested. In August 2017, money got so tight that she had to live on the street, according to court records. She didn’t have $500 to bail herself out of jail and had to stay locked up while aw...

This is big.  The Fifth Circuit has issued an en banc opinion in the Dallas Federal litigation called Daves v. Dallas County.  The opinion was issued yesterday.  This is a huge opinion that addresses three issues.  Listen to our podcast to learn more.   Also available on: Apple Podcasts-            CLICK HERE Spotify-                        CLICK HERE Google Podcasts-        CLICK HERE Podcast Index-            CLICK HERE Amazon Music-          CLICK HERE Stitcher-                      CLICK HERE iHeart-                        CLICK HERE TuneIn + Alexa          CLICK HERE Po...

  This is big.  The Fifth Circuit has issued an en banc opinion in the Dallas Federal litigation.  The case is Cause No. 18-11368; Daves v. Dallas County ; In the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (January 7, 2022).  This opinion addresses the following issues: A.    Whether judges can be sued based upon a 1983 claim for setting bail.  The Daves case attempted to build off of the ODonnell case in Houston.  In ODonnell , the plaintiffs only sued the midemeanor judges.  In Daves , the plaintiffs sued the district court judges and the misdemeanor judges.  The trial court issued essentially the same injunction issued in ODonnell  and applied it to the district court judges as well.  The trial court also held that substantively bail was constitutional.  All parties appealed.  On appeal, a panel of three judges issued a decision last year that held that it was improper to expand ODonnell to the dist...