Case: Luckey v. Miller

4:86-cv-00297 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia

Filed Date: Jan. 1, 1990

Closed Date: 1991

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On 10/24/1986, a group of criminal defense attorneys and indigent criminal defendants filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 class action lawsuit against Georgia state officials (including the governor and all state court judges responsible for appointing attorneys to indigent criminal defendants) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The plaintiffs claimed that a number of inadequacies in Georgia's indigent criminal defense system (including inadequate resources, delays in the app…

On 10/24/1986, a group of criminal defense attorneys and indigent criminal defendants filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 class action lawsuit against Georgia state officials (including the governor and all state court judges responsible for appointing attorneys to indigent criminal defendants) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The plaintiffs claimed that a number of inadequacies in Georgia's indigent criminal defense system (including inadequate resources, delays in the appointment of counsel, pressure on attorneys to hurry their clients' case to trial or to enter a guilty plea, and inadequate supervision) deprived indigent criminal defendants of their rights to counsel, due process, and equal protection. Plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU, the Georgia Law Center for the Homeless, and private counsel, sought injunctive relief to remedy the alleged deficiencies.

On June 24, 1987 and December 31, 1988, the District Court (Judge Harold L. Murphy) granted Defendants' motion to dismiss on two alternate grounds. First, the District Court reasoned that, while individual state officials had been the nominal defendants, the suit was, in essence, brought against the State of Georgia and was therefore barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Second, the District Court held that, independent of the Eleventh Amendment rationale, the suit ought to be dismissed because Plaintiffs' complaint failed to state a claim for which relief could be granted. Plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

On November 23, 1988, a panel of the Eleventh Circuit (Judge Robert Smith Vance) reversed, rejecting both grounds for the District Court's dismissal. Luckey v. Harris, 860 F.2d 1012 (11th Cir. 1988). The Court first held that the suit was not barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity because, under the Ex Parte Young exception to the Eleventh Amendment, a suit seeking prospective relief against state officials is not deemed to be a suit against the state. The Eleventh Circuit also rejected the second ground for the District Court's dismissal, holding that Plaintiffs' complaint stated a claim upon which relief could be granted despite the fact that it did not allege the "future inevitability of ineffective assistance." The Court thereby reversed the dismissal and remanded to the District Court.

The defendants were unsuccessful in their attempts to have the Eleventh Circuit panel's decision overturned. On December 29, 1989, the Eleventh Circuit, in a per curiam decision, denied Defendants' petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc, Luckey v. Harris, 896 F.2d 479 (11th Cir. 1989), and, on May 29, 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Defendants' petition for a writ of certiorari, Luckey v. Harris, 495 U.S. 957 (1989).

Upon remand to the District Court, the defendants filed a renewed motion to dismiss the case on the basis of the abstention doctrine as set forth in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). On July 10, 1990 the District Court denied the renewed motion to dismiss, holding that it was bound by the law of the case. The District Court reasoned that, while the Eleventh Circuit had not explicitly ruled on the abstention issue, it had sent the clear message that the case should be heard. The District Court nevertheless certified the issue for immediate appeal. The Eleventh Circuit (Judge Stanley F. Birch, Jr.) agreed to hear the case, Luckey v. Miller, 918 F.2d 888 (11th Cir. 1991), and, on April 23, 1991, the Eleventh Circuit (Judge Joel Fredrick Dubina) reversed on the law of the case issue, Luckey v. Miller, 929 F.2d 618 (11th Cir. 1991). The case was again remanded.

On remand, the District Court (Judge Murphy) considered Defendants' abstention argument and, on that ground, dismissed the case on December 16, 1991. The dismissal was affirmed by the Eleventh Circuit on November 4, 1992. Luckey v. Miller, 976 F.2d 673 (11th Cir. 1992) (per curiam).

According to the PACER docket, no further appeals were taken and the case was closed.

Summary Authors

Krista Swip (7/12/2007)

People


Judge(s)

Birch, Stanley F. Jr. (Georgia)

Cox, Emmett Ripley (Alabama)

Dubina, Joel Fredrick (Alabama)

Dyer, David William (Georgia)

Edmondson, James Larry (Georgia)

Fay, Peter Thorp (Florida)

Hatchett, Joseph Woodrow (Florida)

Kravitch, Phyllis A. (Georgia)

Murphy, Harold Lloyd (Georgia)

Scott, Thomas Emerson Jr. (Florida)

Judge(s)

Birch, Stanley F. Jr. (Georgia)

Cox, Emmett Ripley (Alabama)

Dubina, Joel Fredrick (Alabama)

Dyer, David William (Georgia)

Edmondson, James Larry (Georgia)

Fay, Peter Thorp (Florida)

Hatchett, Joseph Woodrow (Florida)

Kravitch, Phyllis A. (Georgia)

Murphy, Harold Lloyd (Georgia)

Scott, Thomas Emerson Jr. (Florida)

Tjoflat, Gerald Bard (Florida)

Vance, Robert Smith (Alabama)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Aphrin, Derek (Georgia)

Bradley, Neil T. (Georgia)

Cromartie, John L. Jr. (Georgia)

Dodd, Roger J (Georgia)

Garrett, Susan (Georgia)

Gideon, Megan E. (Georgia)

Keenan, Don (Georgia)

Kocher, Eric G. (Georgia)

McDonald, Laughlin (Georgia)

Remar, Robert B. (Georgia)

Tolley, Edward Donald (Georgia)

Webster, David A. (Georgia)

Wilde, Kathleen L. (Georgia)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Dunn, Dennis R. (Georgia)

Evans, Alfred L. Jr. (Georgia)

Hill, William Bradley Jr. (Georgia)

Hobbs, Michael E. (Georgia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket (PACER)

Luckey, et al v. Harris, et al

Jan. 26, 1993 Docket

Amended Complaint - Class Action

Cannon v. Harris

Nov. 25, 1986 Complaint

Appellate Decision

Luckey v. Harris

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

860 F.2d 1012

Nov. 23, 1988 Order/Opinion

On Petitions for Rehearing and Suggestions of Rehearing In Banc [From Eleventh Court of Appeals]

Luckey v. Harris

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

896 F.2d 479

Dec. 29, 1989 Order/Opinion

[Untitled]

Harris v. Luckey

Supreme Court of the United States

495 U.S. 957, 109 L.Ed.2d 744

May 29, 1990 Order/Opinion

Brief in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Luckey v. Harris

Oct. 30, 1990 Pleading / Motion / Brief
32

Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Luckey v. Harris

Oct. 30, 1990 Pleading / Motion / Brief

Appellate Decision

Harris v. Luckey

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

918 F.2d 888

Nov. 16, 1990 Order/Opinion

Appellate Decision

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

929 F.2d 618

April 23, 1991 Order/Opinion

Appellate Decision [With District Court Opinion Attached as Appendix]

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

976 F.2d 673

Nov. 4, 1992 Order/Opinion

Resources

Title Description External URL

(Un)Luckey v. Miller: The Case for a Structural Injunction to Improve Indigent Defense Services

Rodger Citron

This Note argues that litigation seeking a structural injunction--a detailed remedial order providing affirmative relief--to improve state systems for providing indigent defense services is necessary… Nov. 1, 1991 http://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/scholarlyworks/303/

(Un)Luckey v. Miller: The Case for aStructural Injunction to ImproveIndigent Defense Services

Rodger Citron

The Sixth Amendment guarantees defendants in all criminal prosecutions the right to the assistance of counsel.' The right to counsel is essential to the working of the criminal justice system, as the… https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=7402&context=ylj

Docket

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link

Court of Appeals appeal by plaintiff [15-0] acknowledgement. USCA dkt no. 88-8047 (vv) (Entered: 12/03/1990)

Jan. 27, 1988

FORTHWITH LETTER from U.S.C.A. (vv) (Entered: 12/03/1990)

Feb. 4, 1988

Certified and TRANSMITTED RECORD to U.S. Court of Appeals appeal by plaintiff [15-0] . (vv) (Entered: 12/03/1990)

Feb. 5, 1988
17

Certified copy of JUDGMENT OF USCA REMANDED to the District Court for further action. judgment of this court. Court of Appeals appeal [15-0] (vv) (Entered: 01/22/1990)

Jan. 22, 1990

Case reopened. (vv) (Entered: 01/22/1990)

Jan. 22, 1990
18

ORDER making mandate the judgment of the U.S. District Court by Judge Harold L. Murphy . cc (dd) (Entered: 01/23/1990)

Jan. 22, 1990

Record on appeal returned from Court of Appeals appeal by plaintiff [15-0] . (vv) (Entered: 02/15/1990)

Feb. 15, 1990
19

Order from USCA that the appellees motion for recall and stay off issuance of mandate pending petition for writ of certiorari is denied. (ln) (Entered: 02/21/1990)

Feb. 16, 1990
20

REQUEST by counsel for plaintiffs for clerk to enter default as to Joe Frank Harris, Joe C. Crumbley, Robert J. Noland . (advised by law clerk Phil Savrin that Judge Murphy said time was to run from time of motion for stay was denied) (ln) (Entered: 02/21/1990)

Feb. 20, 1990
21

MOTION by defendant Joe Frank Harris, defendant Joe C. Crumbley, defendant Robert J. Noland to stay proceedings with brief in support pending disposition of petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court. (dd) (Entered: 03/06/1990)

Feb. 22, 1990
22

PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE to motion to stay proceedings by Robert J. Noland, Joe C. Crumbley, Joe Frank Harris [21-1] (dd) (Entered: 03/07/1990)

March 7, 1990

SUBMITTED to Judge Harold L. Murphy on motion to stay proceedings by Robert J. Noland, Joe C. Crumbley, Joe Frank Harris [21-1], motion response [22-1] (dd) (Entered: 03/14/1990)

March 14, 1990
23

ORDER DENYING motion to stay proceedings by Robert J. Noland, Joe C. Crumbley, Joe Frank Harris [21-1] by Judge Harold L. Murphy; cc (dd) (Entered: 03/21/1990)

March 21, 1990
25

Copy of order from U.S. Supreme Court denying certiorari. (vv) (Entered: 06/06/1990)

June 6, 1990
26

RESPONSE by plaintiffs Horace Luckey III, M. V. Booker, William F. Braziel Jr., G. Terry Jackson, Joseph Saia, Charles Thornton & Beverly Cannon to [24-1] defendants' purported reassertion of pending motions to dismiss. (ln) (Entered: 06/26/1990)

June 26, 1990

SUBMITTED to Judge Harold L. Murphy on [24-1], response by plaintiff [26-1] (ln) (Entered: 06/26/1990)

June 26, 1990
27

Defendants' reply to plaintiffs' response in opposition to defendants' reassertion of pending motions to dismiss on non-justiciability/absetention grounds (dd) (Entered: 07/06/1990)

July 6, 1990
28

ORDER DENYING defendants renewed motion to dismiss[24-1] that the proceedings in this Court shall NOT BE STAYED, but SHALL CONTINUE during the pendency of any appeal permitted by the Court of Appeals by Judge Harold L. Murphy cc (ln) Modified on 11/19/1990 (Entered: 07/10/1990)

July 10, 1990
29

Plaintiffs' supplemental RESPONSE to reply brief [27-1] (dd) (Entered: 07/11/1990)

July 11, 1990

Letter from the Court to atty Alfred L. Evans, Jr. excusing him from personal appearance before the Court for the period Aug. 6-20, l990. (vv) (Entered: 07/18/1990)

July 17, 1990
30

ANSWERS to amended complaint by Robert J. Noland, Joe C. Crumbley, Joe Frank Harris . (dd) (Entered: 07/20/1990)

July 20, 1990
31

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION to amend complaint [1-0] with brief support. (dd) Modified on 10/30/1990 (Entered: 10/30/1990)

Oct. 30, 1990
32

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION for preliminary injunction with brie and exhibits in support. (dd) Modified on 10/30/1990 (Entered: 10/30/1990)

Oct. 30, 1990
33

ORDER setting hearing on motion for preliminary injunction [32-1] and on motion to amend complaint [1-0] [31-1] for 10:00 AM 11/19/90 by Judge Harold L. Murphy cc (ln) (Entered: 11/05/1990)

Nov. 5, 1990
34

BRIEF by Joe Frank Harris, Joe C. Crumbley, Robert J. Noland in opposition to motion to amend complaint [1-0] [31-1], motion for preliminary injunction [32-1] . (ln) (Entered: 11/14/1990)

Nov. 14, 1990

SUBMITTED to Judge Harold L. Murphy on motion to amend complaint [1-0] [31-1], motion for preliminary injunction [32-1], opposing motion by Robert J. Noland, Joe C. Crumbley, Joe Frank Harris [34-1] (ln) (Entered: 11/14/1990)

Nov. 14, 1990
35

CONSENT ORDER extending discovery to 4/19/91 Discovery ends 4/19/91 by Judge Harold L. Murphy ; cc. (dd) (Entered: 11/16/1990)

Nov. 16, 1990

acknowledgement. USCA dkt no. 90-9062 (vv) (Entered: 12/20/1990)

Nov. 16, 1990
37

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF in support of motion for preliminary injunction [32-1] (dd) (Entered: 11/20/1990)

Nov. 20, 1990
38

Affidavit of G. Scott Sampson. (ln) (Entered: 11/26/1990)

Nov. 26, 1990

USCA appeal fees received $ l05.00 (vv) (Entered: 12/03/1990)

Nov. 30, 1990
39

Copy of ORDER of the U.S. Court of Appeals granting appellants permission to appeal and STAYING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN THE DISTRICT COURT PENDING RESOLUTION OF THIS APPEAL. (This order was filed in the Court of Appeals on Nov. l6, l990, but a copy was not rec'd by the Clerk, USDC until l2/6/90. (vv) (Entered: 12/06/1990)

Dec. 6, 1990

Letter from USCA requesting Certificate of Readiness. (vv) (Entered: 12/06/1990)

Dec. 6, 1990
40

Certificate of Readiness forwarded to USCA. (vv) (Entered: 12/06/1990)

Dec. 6, 1990

Certified and TRANSMITTED RECORD to U.S. Court of Appeals appeal by plaintiff [15-0] . (This record forwarded USCA per telephone request by Dwight Briggs, Deputy Clerk, USCA) (vv) (Entered: 12/21/1990)

Dec. 21, 1990

Letter from the Court to atty Alfred Evans, Jr. excusing him from personal appearance before the Court for the periods Aug. 5-9 and Aug. l9-23, l991. (vv) (Entered: 07/08/1991)

July 2, 1991
41

PLAINTIFFS' SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF in opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss(which has not been filed yet) (dd) (Entered: 08/09/1991)

Aug. 9, 1991
42

Certified copy of JUDGMENT OF USCA VACATING THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT COURT and REMANDING the case to the District Court for further action. judgment of this court. Court of Appeals appeal [15-0]; c.c. (vv) Modified on 09/06/1991 (Entered: 09/04/1991)

Aug. 30, 1991
43

RENEWAL of defendants' MOTION to dismiss on remand with brief in support. (dd) Modified on 09/06/1991 (Entered: 09/04/1991)

Sept. 3, 1991

Record on appeal returned from USCA. (vv) (Entered: 09/04/1991)

Sept. 3, 1991
44

ORDER making mandate the judgment of the District Court by Judge Harold L. Murphy; c.c. (vv) (Entered: 09/06/1991)

Sept. 5, 1991

SUBMITTED on motion for preliminary injunction [32-1], motion to amend complaint [1-0] [31-1] to Judge Harold L. Murphy . (ln) (Entered: 09/18/1991)

Sept. 18, 1991

SUBMITTED on motion to dismiss on remand [43-1] to Judge Harold L. Murphy . (dd) (Entered: 09/23/1991)

Sept. 23, 1991
44

ORDER GRANTING motion to dismiss on remand [43-1] by Judge Harold L. Murphy cc (dd) Modified on 01/14/1992 (Entered: 12/16/1991)

Dec. 16, 1991
45

JUDGMENT ENTERED on for defendants Robert J. Noland, Joe C. Crumbley & Joe Frank Harris against plaintiffs Horace Luckey III, M. V. Booker, William F. Braziel Jr., G. Terry Jackson, Joseph Saia, Charles Thornton, & Beverly Cannon cc (dd) Modified on 01/14/1992 (Entered: 12/16/1991)

Dec. 16, 1991
46

NOTICE OF APPEAL from order [44-1], judgment [45-1] by plaintiff Horace Luckey III, plaintiff M. V. Booker, plaintiff William F. Braziel Jr., plaintiff G. Terry Jackson, plaintiff Joseph Saia, plaintiff Charles Thornton, plaintiff Beverly Cannon . FILING FEE $ 105.00 RECEIPT # 159589 (vv) (Entered: 01/14/1992)

Jan. 14, 1992

Certified copy of Notice of appeal by plaintiffs, Order and Judgment entered December l6, l991, and certified copy of docket to U.S. Court of Appeals for Court of Appeals appeal [46-1] . (vv) (Entered: 01/14/1992)

Jan. 14, 1992

Acknowledgment by Court of Appeals regarding Court of Appeals appeal by plaintiff [46-1] . USCA dkt no. 92-8038 (vv) (Entered: 01/21/1992)

Jan. 15, 1992

Letter rec'd from USCA requesting Certificate of Readiness. (vv) (Entered: 01/29/1992)

Jan. 27, 1992

CERTIFICATE OF READINESS OF RECORD ON APPEAL with certified copy of docket mailed to USCA . (vv) (Entered: 01/29/1992)

Jan. 29, 1992

FORTHWITH LETTER from U.S. Court of Appeals regarding Court of Appeals appeal by plaintiff [46-1] (vv) Modified on 05/14/1992 (Entered: 05/14/1992)

May 8, 1992

Certified and TRANSMITTED RECORD to U.S. Court of Appeals appeal by plaintiff [46-1] . (vv) (Entered: 05/14/1992)

May 14, 1992
47

Certified copy of JUDGMENT & OPINION OF USCA AFFIRMING judgment of this court. Court of Appeals appeal [46-1]; copy Judgment to cnsl. (vv) (Entered: 01/26/1993)

Jan. 26, 1993

Record on appeal returned from USCA. (vv) (Entered: 01/26/1993)

Jan. 26, 1993

State / Territory: Georgia

Case Type(s):

Indigent Defense

Key Dates

Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1990

Closing Date: 1991

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

All indigent persons presently charged or who will be charged in the future with criminal offenses in the courts of Georgia and all attorneys who represent or will represent indigent defendants in the Georgia courts

Attorney Organizations:

NDRN/Protection & Advocacy Organizations

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

State of Georgia, State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Equal Protection

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

Reproductive rights:

Fetus Identity

General:

Conflict of interest

Funding

Quality of representation