Bobby M. v. Martinez

Bobby M. v. Martinez, Case No. TCA 83-7003 (N.D. Fla., J. Paul), 907 F. Supp. 368 (N.D. Fla. 1995)
Jodi Siegel, Reforming Florida's Juvenile Justice System: a Case Example of Bobby M. v. Chiles, 19 Fla. State Univ. L. Rev. 693 (Winter 1992).

This statewide class action suit was brought on behalf of approximately 1,000 youth confined to Florida's juvenile training schools, which then were the only facilities for youth in the delinquency system. The suit challenged the conditions and practices of those schools, and alleged unconstitutional conditions of confinement and inappropriate placements. Preliminary injunctions banned hogtying, restricted lock up, barred admission of males under age 13, prohibited admissions of any females, prohibited admissions of runaways, truants and status offenders regardless of age, and closed the facility located in Ocala (McPherson Training School). On the eve of trial, the State settled. Three consent decrees were entered that phased down the two remaining schools to 130 youths each, permanently closed the lock-up units, mandated treatment and educational services, provided access to counsel, and required the development of a new juvenile justice system. The new system included individualized, multi-disciplinary assessments and a broad array of community-based programs providing substance-abuse programs, sex-dysfunction programs, prevention and diversion projects, and gang-prevention projects. SLC led the monitoring and enforcement phase (except for educational issues). The Florida Legislature enacted the Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 1990 to implement Bobby M. and appropriated $52.7 million for the new programs for the first year of implementation. The new programs provided over 1,700 new community-based residential beds and services and treatment for over 120,000 youth per year. In connection with this legislative implementation, SLC was retained by the Florida House of Representatives as Special Counsel. Co-counsel: National Prison Project, Youth Law Center & Michael C. Dale.

Previous
Previous

RMP v. Jones

Next
Next

Coalition for Advocacy v. Chiles