In the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Jacksonville Division Case Number 98-1185-CIV-J-16C
SCOTT BLEDSOE and )
FLORIDIANS FOR MEDICAL RIGHTS, )
a registered Political Action Committee, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
) VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR
v. ) DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
) AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
NATHANIEL GLOVER, in his official )
capacity as Sheriff of Duval County, and )
TOMMIE R. BELL, in her official )
capacity as Supervisor of Elections for )
Duval County, )
)
Defendants. )
Plaintiffs Scott Bledsoe and Floridians for Medical Rights bring this
suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking a judgment declaring certain
actions taken by the Duval County Sheriff’s Department and the Duval
County Supervisor of Elections to be unconstitutional under the First and
Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs also ask
the Court to permanently enjoin the challenged actions in the future.
JURISDICTION
1. This suit is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983:
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom,
or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects,
or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person
within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges,
or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the
party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding
for redress . . . .
2. This case arises under the Constitution of the United States, and
this Court has original jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343.
3. Declaratory and injunctive relief are authorized by
28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.
4. Plaintiffs’ claims in Counts Three and Four, arising under state law,
are within the Court’s supplemental jurisdiction, under 28 U.S.C. §1367(c).
PARTIES
5. Plaintiff Scott Bledsoe is a natural person and a resident of
Orange Park, Florida.
6. Plaintiff Floridians for Medical Rights (“FMR”), is a
Political Action Committee, registered in the State of Florida.
7. Defendant Nathaniel Glover is the Sheriff of Duval County, Florida,
and is sued only in his official capacity.
8. Defendant Tommie R. Bell, is the Supervisor of Elections for
Duval County, Florida, and is sued only in her official capacity.
VENUE
9. All actions complained of herein occurred in the City of
Jacksonville, Duval County, Florida, which is located within the Middle District
of Florida, Jacksonville Division. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
FACTS
10. Scott Bledsoe is an activist in a political movement to change
the laws of the United States and the several states prohibiting the sale
and possession of marijuana.
11. Plaintiff FMR is a political action committee organized for the
purpose of soliciting signatures on a ballot initiative designed to amend
the Florida Constitution to permit the medicinal use of marijuana.
12. Section 3, Article XI of the Florida Constitution provides for
amendment of the Florida Constitution by way of citizen initiatives:
The power to propose the revisions or amendment of any portion or portions of
this constitution by initiative is reserved to the people, provided that,
any such revision or amendment, except for those limiting the power of
government to raise revenue, shall embrace but one subject and matter
directly connected therewith. It may be invoked by filing with the secretary
of state a petition containing a copy of the proposed revision or amendment,
signed by a number of electors in each of one half of the congressional
districts of the state, and of the state as whole, equal to eight percent
of the votes cast in each of such districts respectively and in the state as
a whole in the last preceding election in which presidential electors
were chosen.
13. In order for a citizen initiative to be placed on the ballot,
the sponsor of the proposed amendment must secure the signature of a certain
number of registered voters.
14. At all times material hereto, the Plaintiffs have been involved
in a statewide project to solicit signatures for a medical marijuana ballot
initiative.
15. Plaintiffs routinely solicit signatures for the medical marijuana
initiative at public rallies known as “Hempfests,” at courthouses throughout
the State, at polling stations where elections are being conducted, and at
other public places.
16. FMR is the political action committee registered with the
State of Florida which has been authorized to promote the medical
marijuana ballot initiative and to take actions designed to secure the
requisite number of signatures to have the initiative placed on the ballot.
FMR has collected thousands of signatures in support of the medical
marijuana initiative and expects to have the initiative placed on the
ballot at the election to be conducted in the year 2000.
17. The timing of this medical marijuana initiative is important
as the movement has gained momentum throughout the country and has
successfully passed similar initiatives in a number of other states.1
18. Bledsoe has assisted FMR in collecting signatures in the past
and he will continue to do so in the future.
19. As part of his efforts, Bledsoe regularly speaks with electors and
potential electors regarding the medical marijuana initiative and the
legalization of marijuana in general. Bledsoe regularly distributes
literature from such organizations as FMR and Florida Cannabis Action Network, Inc.
20. Plaintiffs concentrate their efforts to secure signatures at
polling stations because those persons appearing at polling stations are far
more likely to be registered voters and because elections-oriented issues
are especially appropriate at such times and places.
21. On November 3, 1998, FMR had tables set up at polling stations
throughout the State, including Jacksonville, Jacksonville Beach, Gainesville,
Tampa, Orlando and Fort Lauderdale. The purpose of these tables was to
solicit signatures for the medical marijuana initiative. Signatures were
obtained for the medical marijuana initiative without incident except for
the actions complained of which occurred in the City of Jacksonville.2
22. The office of the Supervisor of Elections has designated the
Hendricks Avenue Baptist Church, at 4001 Hendricks Avenue, Jacksonville,
as an official polling station for Duval County, Precinct 5E.
23. On November 3, 1998, at approximately 2:30 P.M. FMR, Bledsoe
and several other individuals set up a table on a sidewalk at the Hendricks
Avenue Baptist Church. The table was set up for the purpose of obtaining
signatures for the medical marijuana initiative.
24. Plaintiffs’ table was located 150 feet from the entrance to
the Hendricks Avenue Baptist Church polling station along a wide arched
sidewalk near Hendricks Avenue.
25. Plaintiffs did not impede the flow of pedestrian or vehicular
traffic, were not unruly or disruptive and did not accost or harass voters
coming into the polling station. Plaintiffs complied in all respects
with the requirements of §102.031(3), Fla. Stat. and all other provisions of
Florida and federal law.
26. Plaintiffs set out literature on their table describing the
initiative and providing information regarding uses for cannabis hemp and
the laws governing marijuana.
27. Plaintiffs set out a sign reading
“SIGN FOR MEDICAL FREEDOM: FLORIDA MEDICAL MARIJUANA BALLOT INITIATIVE STOP
JAILING SICK PEOPLE AND THEIR DOCTORS.
28. The sidewalk leading to the polling place was, on
November 3rd, a traditional public forum.
29. Plaintiffs’ activities were protected under the First Amendment
as core political speech.
30. The Hendricks Avenue Baptist Church was selected by Plaintiffs
because it is believed to be one of Jacksonville’s largest and most active
polling stations. Accordingly, Plaintiffs believed that they would be
afforded access to a large number of registered voters.
31. On November 3, 1998, Hendricks Avenue Baptist Church was a
registered polling station for Duval County Florida (Precinct 5E) and voters
did make use of that polling station for the 1998 general election.
32. A few minutes after Plaintiffs set up their table, an unknown
individual who claimed to be affiliated with the Church approached Bledsoe
and demanded that Plaintiffs leave because the Church was “private property.”
33. The unknown individual grabbed Plaintiffs’ sign and
attempted to remove it.
34. Bledsoe told this “church worker” that Plaintiffs were not
interfering with the electoral process and that they had a right to collect
signatures and distribute literature.
35. The “church worker” left, then returned approximately ten
minutes later with an individual who was identified as a poll worker.
36. The poll worker informed Plaintiffs that they had to leave
immediately because the Church was private property.
37. Bledsoe told the poll worker that he had a right to collect
signatures on petitions and to distribute literature.
38. Bledsoe requested that the poll worker call the Supervisor of
Elections to confirm Plaintiffs’ right to be at the polling station.
39. The poll worker left and returned a few minutes later.
40. The “church worker” appeared and again demanded that
Plaintiffs leave the Church premises.3
41. The poll worker then intervened to calm the “church worker”
down, but did not direct him to cease his activities or advise him that
Plaintiffs had a right to solicit signatures and distribute literature.
42. The “church worker” then went to the Pastor of the Church,
Jack A. Snell, to complain about Plaintiffs’ table.
43. Approximately 20-30 minutes later, Deputy Tom L. Martin, a
Duval County Deputy Sheriff, approached Plaintiffs’ table and advised
Bledsoe that “The pastor of the church has asked that you leave.” Deputy
Martin did not advise Plaintiffs that they were too close to the polling
station or otherwise violating any laws of the State.
44. Bledsoe told Martin that Plaintiffs had a constitutional right
to solicit signatures for the medical marijuana ballot initiative and to
distribute literature concerning this issue. He further stated that they
were beyond the 50 foot limit specified by Florida law and that Plaintiffs
were otherwise conducting themselves lawfully.
45. Bledsoe asked Martin to contact the Supervisor of Elections to
determine if Plaintiffs were within their rights to remain at their location.
46. Martin responded that “You have two choices, you can leave or
be arrested.”
47. Plaintiffs immediately packed up their table and left under
threat of arrest, at approximately 3:10 P.M.
48. Plaintiffs’ actions in soliciting signatures for the medical
marijuana initiative, discussing those issues with voters and distributing
literature concerning the initiative and marijuana laws in general are
protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, as the
highest form of political speech. Such activities are also protected by the
Florida Constitution and by Florida and federal laws.
49. Plaintiffs’ actions in soliciting signatures for the medical
marijuana initiative and discussing those issues with voters are actions
directly related to the electoral process and the right of the citizenry to
vote on issues of common concern and are protected by the Fifteenth Amendment
to the United States Constitution. Such activities are also protected by the
Florida Constitution and by Florida and federal laws.
50. The laws of the United States and the State of Florida protect
political speech at polling stations.
51. Under Florida law, the Supervisor of Elections is required to
train election personnel to ensure that the process at polling stations is
orderly and in accordance with law:
§102.012(8), Fla. Stat. - The supervisor of elections shall conduct
training classes for inspectors, clerks and deputy sheriffs prior to each
first primary, general and special election for the purpose of instructing
such persons in their duties and responsibilities as election officials. ...
§102.031(3)(e), Fla. Stat. - Each supervisor of elections shall inform
the clerk of each precinct of the area within which soliciting is unlawful,
based on the particular characteristics of that polling place. ...
52. Under Florida law, the Sheriff of Duval County is specifically
required to appoint deputies for each election precinct to ensure that the
process at polling stations is orderly and in accordance with law:
§102.031(2), Fla. Stat. - The sheriff shall deputize a deputy sheriff for each precinct
who shall be present during the time the polls are open and until the
election is completed, who shall be subject to all lawful commands of the
clerk or inspectors, and who shall maintain good order . . . .
53. Defendants and their various deputies, agents and appointees
have an affirmative obligation both to permit the exercise of Plaintiffs rights
of free speech and participation in the electoral process and to maintain
order so as to prevent others from interfering with Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.
54. The actions of Deputy Martin, acting under acting under color
of state law pursuant to authority delegated to him by the Sheriff, violated
Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights to solicit signatures for an election
initiative, to discuss political issues of concern to the electorate, to
distribute literature concerning their political cause, to petition the government
for redress of grievances, and to otherwise participate in the electoral
process.
55. The actions of Deputy Martin, acting under acting under color
of state law pursuant to authority delegated to him by the Sheriff, further
violated the rights of the registered voters and others in Duval County who
wish to participate in the petition process to amend the Florida constitution.
Without the signatures of electors from Duval County and elsewhere in the
State, the citizens of Florida will be denied the opportunity to vote on an
issue of great public importance.
56. The Supervisor of Elections, acting under color of state law
through the poll worker assigned to the Hendricks Avenue Baptist Church,
violated Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights to solicit signatures for an
election initiative, to discuss political issues of concern to the electorate,
to distribute literature concerning their political cause to petition the government
for redress of grievances, and to otherwise participate in the electoral process.
57. The Supervisor of Elections, acting under color of state law through
the poll worker assigned to the Hendricks Avenue Baptist Church, further
violated the rights the registered voters and others in Duval County who wish
to participate in the petition process to amend the Florida constitution.
Without the signatures of electors from Duval County and elsewhere in the
State, the citizens of Florida will be denied the opportunity to vote on an
issue of great public importance.
58. At all times pertinent hereto the Defendants were, and are,
acting under color of state law and authority.
59. Plaintiffs intend to continue their attempts to solicit signatures
for the medical marijuana ballot initiative and to distribute literature
regarding marijuana-related issues in Duval County. In particular,
Plaintiffs intend to solicit signatures and distribute literature at polling
places within Duval County at upcoming federal, state and local special and
general elections. Plaintiff will again solicit signatures and distribute
literature at the Hendricks Avenue Baptist Church, so long as the Church
continues to be listed as a polling station for Duval County.
60. Plaintiffs, through their undersigned counsel, have made demand
upon the Defendants to adopt such policies and conduct such training courses
as may be necessary to prevent violations of Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights
at polling stations in the future.4
61. Plaintiffs also attempted to make use of the limited administrative
procedures available for processing election complaints. In particular
Bledsoe made a formal complaint to the Internal Affairs Unit of the Jacksonville
Sheriff’s Office and directly with the Supervisor of Elections.
62. The Supervisor of Elections made no response whatsoever to Plaintiffs’
complaint and demand letter.
63. The Sheriff made no response to Plaintiffs’ demand letter.
However, the Internal Affairs Unit issued a letter claiming that the
Deputy’s “actions adhere to Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office policies and
procedures.”5
64. Plaintiffs have a reasonable fear that the same policies and
procedures which resulted in the deprivation of their constitutional rights
will be applied against them during further elections at the Hendricks Avenue
Baptist Church and elsewhere in Duval County. This fear is based on the fact
that Defendants have refused to change their existing polices and procedures
coupled with the near certainty that Plaintiffs’ political activities will
again bring them into contact with Defendants and their deputies, appointees
and agents at polling stations.
COUNT ONE — DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
(Federal constitutional rights)
65. Plaintiffs reallege the facts set forth in ¶¶ 1-64, and
incorporate those facts in this Count by reference.
66. A controversy has arisen between the parties concerning
Plaintiffs’ rights to solicit signatures for a constitutional ballot initiative
and to distribute related literature at polling stations in Duval County.
67. Plaintiffs have a right to have this Court declare their
rights under the First, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments as those rights
are infringed upon by the Defendants’ actions, policies and procedures.
COUNT TWO — PERMANENT INJUNCTION
(Federal constitutional rights)
68. Plaintiffs reallege the facts set forth in ¶¶ 1-64, and
incorporate those facts in this Count by reference.
69. Plaintiffs have a clear legal right under federal law to solicit
signatures for a constitutional ballot initiative and to distribute literature
at polling stations on election days.
70. The actions, policies and procedures of the Defendants have caused
a violation of Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights Those policies and procedures
also fail to protect those rights from the actions of third parties.
71. Plaintiffs will suffer an irreparable injury unless the Court issues
a permanent injunction prohibiting Defendants from violating Plaintiffs’
constitutional rights in the future.
72. Plaintiffs will suffer an irreparable injury unless the Court
issues a permanent injunction requiring Defendants to carry out their statutory
duties to educate, train and monitor staff at polling stations to insure that
violations of constitutional rights do not continue to occur.
73. A permanent injunction, prohibiting the enforcement of the Defendants’
current policies and procedures relative to political action at polling stations,
would not be contrary to the public interest.
COUNT THREE — DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
(Florida constitutional rights)
74. Plaintiffs reallege the facts set forth in ¶¶ 1-64, and incorporate
those facts in this Count by reference.
75. A controversy has arisen between the parties concerning Plaintiffs’
rights to solicit signatures for a constitutional ballot initiative and to distribute
related literature at polling stations in Duval County, Florida.
76. Plaintiffs have a right to have this Court declare their rights
under Article I, Sections 1, 4 and 5 of the Florida Constitution as those rights
are infringed upon by the Defendants’ actions, policies and procedures.
77. Plaintiffs further have a right to have this Court declare their
rights under Florida statutes and case law pertaining to election day soliciting
and the obligation of the Defendants to secure Plaintiffs’ rights.
COUNT TWO — PERMANENT INJUNCTION
(Florida constitutional rights)
78. Plaintiffs reallege the facts set forth in ¶¶ 1-64, and incorporate
those facts in this Count by reference.
79. Plaintiffs have a clear legal right under Florida law to solicit
signatures for a constitutional ballot initiative and to distribute related literature
at polling stations on designated election days.
80. The actions, policies and procedures of the Defendants have lead
directly to the violation of Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.
81. The actions, policies and procedures of the Defendants have also lead
indirectly to the violation of Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights as Defendants
have failed to take steps mandated by statutes which are necessary to protect
Plaintiffs’ rights against the actions of third parties.
82. Plaintiffs will suffer an irreparable injury unless the Court issues
a permanent injunction prohibiting Defendants from violating Plaintiffs’ rights
under the Florida Constitution.
83. Plaintiffs will suffer an irreparable injury unless the Court issues
a permanent injunction requiring Defendants to carry out their statutory duties
to educate, train and monitor staff at polling stations to insure that violations
of constitutional rights do not continue to occur.
84. Plaintiffs have suffered and will continue to suffer an irreparable injury.
The harm which would be suffered by the Plaintiffs without an injunction —
the loss of their rights to speak, to assemble and to exercise their electoral
rights — exceeds any conceivable harm the Defendants would suffer.
85. A permanent injunction, prohibiting the enforcement of the Defendants’
current policies and procedures relative to political action at polling
stations, would not be contrary to the public interest. Similarly, a
permanent injunction requiring Defendants to carry out their statutory duties
to education, train and monitor staff at polling stations would not be contrary
to the public interest.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Scott Bledsoe and Floridians for Medical Rights
demand the following relief:
A. that this Court take jurisdiction over the parties and this cause;
B. that this Court enter a judgment declaring the Defendants’ policies
and procedures to be unconstitutional under the First and Fifteenth Amendments
to the United States Constitution;
C. that this Court enter a judgment declaring the Defendants’ policies
and procedures to be unconstitutional under Article I, Sections 1, 4 and 5
of the Florida Constitution;
D. that this Court enter an injunction permanently prohibiting the
enforcement of the Defendants’ current policies and procedures concerning
political action at polling stations on election days;
E. that this Court enter a permanent injunction requiring Defendants to
carry out their statutory duties relative to the education, training and
monitoring of staff at polling stations;
F. that this Court award Plaintiffs their recoverable costs, including
a reasonable attorney’s fee pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988; and
G. that this Court award Plaintiffs all other relief in law and in equity
to which they may be entitled.
RICHARD L. WILSON GARY S. EDINGER
Florida Bar No. 212997 Florida Bar Number 0606812
3610 Dubsdread Circle 305 N.E. 1st Street
Orlando, Florida 32804-3052 Gainesville, Florida 32601
(407) 649-9225 (Fax) 423.8727 (352) 338-4440 (Fax) 337-0696
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
DECLARATION
(28 U.S.C. § 1746)
I, SCOTT BLEDSOE, do declare as follows:
1. I have read the foregoing Original Complaint, and all of the facts
alleged in the Complaint are true and correct.
2. I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Dated: December , 1998.
SCOTT BLEDSOE
1 In elections on November 3rd, medical marijuana initiatives received
landslide approval in Alaska, Arizona, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.
2 The City of Jacksonville is consolidated with Duval County, except for
incorporated municipalities within the County.
3 The “church worker” became irate and vocal and stated to Bledsoe that he
“will kick your skinny ass.” Plaintiffs took no action in response to this
threat.
4 A copy of the demand letter sent to the Sheriff of Duval County is
attached as Exhibit “A” to this Complaint. A copy of the letter sent to the
Duval County Supervisor of Elections is attached as Exhibit “B.”
5 Exhibit C.