Lawsuit: 24-hour holds being abused by law enforcement in Ozark, Christian County

A lawsuit says the city of Ozark and Christian County arrest and then detain people for up to 24 hours with the sole intention of punishing them.

The lawyer behind the suit says that this has been an accepted practice within Christian County and throughout the state of Missouri for years but is unconstitutional.

The lawsuit seeks to establish class-action status for the issue and estimated that there are 90 to 2,000 people who could belong to the class. The suit stems from the arrests of two Ozark women several months ago.

According to a police report provided by the city of Ozark, at 10 p.m. on March 8, police were dispatched to an Ozark apartment following a report of “screaming, slamming doors, and someone mentioned something about a baseball bat,” although the scene was quiet when police arrived. Eventually, the report said officers entered the apartment where they found a water pipe, a marijuana “roach,” a half-full bottle of vodka, and Hannah Mosier and Lindsey McMeekin, who were 18 and 24 at the time of the incident.

Both women told police they had drank alcohol and smoked marijuana that day and were charged with possession of drug paraphernalia, the report says, and Mosier was also charged with being a minor in possession of alcohol.

After Mosier and McMeekin were issued citations, police took them to the Christian County Jail where they “were released to the detention staff for a 24 hour hold.”

The lawsuit says this 24-hold was a violation of Mosier and McMeekin’s Fourth Amendment rights, because they were not being investigated for further crimes. The suit also says there was “no intention to hold them for the purpose of determining probable cause and (officers) did not allow them to post bond.”

The lawsuit also cites Sgt. Scott Stopka of the Ozark Police Department as a defendant. According to the police report, Stopka was not one of the officers who arrested Mosier and McMeekin, but he did approve the incident report form.

Mosier and McMeekin’s lawyer, Brandon Potter, said he has been speaking with other attorneys in the area and has been hearing similar stories of police abusing 24-hour holds. Potter said he expects the lawsuit to grow in scope to include the city of Nixa.

Potter said the statute of limitations for this potential class-action lawsuit is five years.

Missouri has a specific statute addressing detainment by police:

“All persons arrested and confined in any jail ... shall be discharged from said custody within twenty-four hours from the time of such arrest, unless they shall be charged with a criminal offense by the oath of some credible person, and be held by warrant to answer to such offense.”

This Missouri law has been discussed in federal court before.

In 1996, a judge who heard U.S. v. Roberts in the Western Missouri district court ruled and called the 24-hour hold statute “not a sword in the hands of the police, but rather a shield for the citizen.”

“The statute does not create an investigative tool for Missouri police officers or an independent basis for arrest; rather, it sets a limit on the amount of time the police may detain a suspect, whose arrest is otherwise lawful, while determining whether there is enough evidence of a crime to present the suspect to a judge or prosecutor to begin criminal proceedings,” the judge wrote.

Lyndle Spencer, who became the chief deputy of the Sheriff’s Department after Brad Cole won the election, said he was unaware of the lawsuit, but he said the practice alleged in the lawsuit does not currently take place at the Christian County jail.

“We don’t do 24-hour holds without investigative purpose,” Spencer said.

The 24-hour hold of Mosier and McMeekin had taken place during the tenure of disgraced former sheriff Joey Kyle, before he pleaded guilty to embezzlement and aiding a fraud scheme in May.

The News-Leader previously reported that shortly after becoming interim sheriff in June, Dwight McNiel reviewed the 24-hour hold policy. At the time, McNiel said in a press release that there was a new policy in place to “eliminate the incarceration of arrestees on municipal ordinance violations.”

McNiel declined to comment on the lawsuit but said ending those type of detentions was a “substantial change in policy” that he enacted the first day he assumed office.

Dave Collignon, city attorney of Ozark, said the city of Ozark has not filed a response to the lawsuit yet. However, Collignon said that he has been in contact with Potter as recently as last week.

“This is going to take a considerable amount of time,” Collignon said, explaining that the before the lawsuit can proceed, the class of people allegedly harmed by the 24-hour holds has to be certified.

Steve Ijames, the interim Ozark police chief, said he is aware of the lawsuit but declined to comment on it. He said the policies of the Ozark police department are compliant with state law.

Ijames was appointed interim chief after Lyle Hodges resigned following publicity of a report investigating his department for nepotism, favoritism, ineffective management and alleged misconduct.

Hodges is now suing the city of Ozark, saying he was forced to resign against his will.

Statue 544.170 of the Missouri Revised Statutes:

1. All persons arrested and confined in any jail or other place of confinement by any peace officer, without warrant or other process, for any alleged breach of the peace or other criminal offense, or on suspicion thereof, shall be discharged from said custody within twenty-four hours from the time of such arrest, unless they shall be charged with a criminal offense by the oath of some credible person, and be held by warrant to answer to such offense.

2. In any confinement to which the provisions of this section apply, the confinee shall be permitted at any reasonable time to consult with counsel or other persons acting on the confinee's behalf.

3. Any person who violates the provisions of this section, by refusing to release any person who is entitled to release pursuant to this section, or by refusing to permit a confinee to consult with counsel or other persons, or who transfers any such confinees to the custody or control of another, or to another place, or who falsely charges such person, with intent to avoid the provisions of this section, is guilty of a class A misdemeanor.