On September 18, 1980, juveniles confined in the Mesa County Jail in Grand Junction, Colorado (MCJ) filed a class action lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Juvenile Justice Act, 42 U.S.C. § 5601 et seq. (JJA), against the Colorado Department of Institutions (DOI) and Division of Youth Services (DYS) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The plaintiff, represented by ACLU of Colorado and the Youth Law Center of San Francisco, California, asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that conditions and practices at the jail violate the 14th Amendment. On February 3, 1982, plaintiffs submitted a Second Amended Complaint to the Court, which specifically contended that defendants subjected them to the following circumstances, not limited to: cruel and unusual conditions of confinement; illegal incarceration in the jail without adequate separation from confined adult offenders; unlawful secure detention of juveniles who are charged with status offenses; denial of adequate and appropriate placements as alternatives to the jail; and false imprisonment. On June 30, 1982, the Court certified the class of juveniles confined, or subject to later confinement, in MCJ.

Negotiation proceeded and on November 8, 1982, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (Judge Richard Paul Matsch) accepted and ordered the Partial Consent Judgment. The defendants agreed that they would: cease use of MCJ for juveniles except when waiting for transfer from court to a juvenile detention facility, and then only for a maximum of 6 hours; cease use of the second floor of MCJ for confinement of any juvenile; identify a separate facility or location suitable for rehabilitation or construction as the Grand Junction Youth Holding Facility (Facility) by December 1, 1982; construct the Facility by April 1, 1982; legislate appropriation for staff at the Facility by June 30, 1985; provide for one wide-awake staff person at all times that a juvenile is confined at the Facility; not place any juvenile in the Facility unless by court order; require all juveniles to be screened by DYS before entering the Facility; not place any juvenile in the Facility who was under 14 or placed there pursuant to a punitive sentence or probation condition; arrange comprehensive intake procedures; give plaintiffs' counsel monthly reports on all juveniles in both the MCJ and new Facility for one year; and notify plaintiffs' counsel within one week of all developments in compliance with the agreement. Additionally, County Board of Commissioners agreed to fund the Sheriff as necessary to comply with the agreement until long term appropriation was made by the 1985 deadline. Plaintiffs agreed to drop all claims for declaratory and injunctive relief after use of MCJ had stopped, but they retained the right to pursue damages.

Because PACER has no docket, we have no more information on this file.

Greg Venker - 05/29/2006


compress summary