Bradley Hester, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated v. Matt Gentry, et al.

Summary

This memorandum opinion addresses motions for judgment on the pleadings in a constitutional challenge to Cullman County, Alabama's bail procedures. The court applies the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Schultz v. Alabama and concludes that the law of the case forecloses the plaintiff's facial equal-protection and due-process challenges to the county's March 2018 bail procedures. The opinion also analyzes the plaintiff's Sixth Amendment right-to-counsel claim concerning initial appearance proceedings.

Holdings

1. The court may take judicial notice of appropriate adjudicative facts, but it may not use judicial notice as a substitute for a motion to amend the complaint or to add factual allegations concerning later arrests.
2. The Eleventh Circuit's decision in Schultz v. Alabama controlled the case and precluded Hester's facial equal-protection and due-process challenges to Cullman County's March 2018 bail procedures.
3. Hester failed to establish that Cullman County's March 2018 bail procedures facially violated the Sixth Amendment because the procedures did not prohibit or impair an indigent defendant from requesting appointed counsel at the initial appearance.
4. Hester could not pursue an as-applied challenge to the March 2018 bail procedures in a representative capacity because his operative complaint did not assert such a claim and he lacked individual standing to raise the issue.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Hester's later arrest records could be judicially noticed to add or support claims concerning events not alleged in the operative complaint.
2. Whether the law of the case required judgment on the pleadings against Hester's facial equal-protection and due-process challenges to Cullman County's March 2018 bail procedures.
3. Whether the March 2018 bail procedures facially violated the Sixth Amendment by failing to provide appointed counsel at an initial appearance.
4. Whether Hester could pursue an as-applied challenge to the March 2018 bail procedures in a representative capacity on behalf of the putative class.

Disposition

dismissed