Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 1 of 16

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA TUCSON DIVISION

GEORGE VICTOR GARCIA, on behalf of himself and the class of similarly situated persons;

Plaintiffs,

vs.

CASE NO:

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY; SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF TONY ESTRADA, in his individual and official capacities; SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF DEPUTIES DOES 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE,

JURY TRIAL REQUESTED

Defendants.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CIVIL AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
AND FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
INTRODUCTION This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief, damages, and punitive damages against SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF TONY ESTRADA, individually and in his official capacity, and SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF DEPUTIES sued under their fictitious names as DOES 1 THROUGH 50, for violations of plaintiff=s constitutional rights resulting from application of SANTA CRUZ COUNTY’S and the SHERIFF=S policies, practices, and customs concerning the use of strip searches and visual body cavity searches in SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail. Plaintiff, for himself and all those in the class of similarly situated persons, seeks an order declaring illegal defendants= policy of subjecting
1

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 2 of 16
detainees in their custody to strip and visual body cavity searches before they are arraigned and without having any reasonable suspicion that the searches will be productive of contraband.
Defendants= strip search and visual body cavity search policies, practices, and customs violate those rights of plaintiff, and all those he represents, that are secured by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and entitle plaintiff, and all those similarly situated, to recover damages under the Federal Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. ' 1983).
Plaintiff alleges against Defendants upon knowledge as to himself and all matters of public record, and upon information and belief as to all other matters, as follows:
I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE This action is brought pursuant to 42 USC '' 1983 and 1988, and the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Jurisdiction is founded upon 28 USC '' 1331 and 1343(a)(3) and (4) and the aforementioned statutory and constitutional provisions. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 USC ' 1391(b).
II. PARTIES 1. Plaintiff GEORGE VICTOR GARCIA, and all those similarly situated, are, and at all material times herein, were residents of the state of Arizona who were arrested within the period beginning two (2) years before the filing of this Complaint, and continuing to this date, and who were subjected to strip and/or visual body cavity searches at SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail (hereinafter referred to as ASANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail@), prior to being arraigned and/or without the defendants first having, and recording in writing, a reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons.
2

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 3 of 16
2. Defendant SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (hereinafter referred to as ASANTA CRUZ COUNTY@) is a body politic and political subdivision of the state of Arizona. SANTA CRUZ COUNTY had an obligation to construct a county jail and to provide for the confinement of prisoners incarcerated under the COUNTY’s jurisdiction. SANTA CRUZ COUNTY had an obligation to appropriate funds and otherwise provide the necessary funding to maintain and operate a facility for the incarceration of prisoners under the jurisdiction of the COUNTY.
3. Defendant SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF TONY ESTRADA (ASHERIFF ESTRADA@) is, and at all material times herein, was a resident of SANTA CRUZ COUNTY and the duly elected SHERIFF of SANTA CRUZ COUNTY with the duty to administer the county jail and provide for the well-being of the prisoners within the county jail. In addition, at all times material hereto, defendant SHERIFF ESTRADA was acting within the scope of his duties as well as under color of law. He is sued in his individual and official capacities.
4. Defendants DOES 1 THROUGH 50, inclusive, are SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF DEPUTIES who were sued herein by their fictitious names and are all deputies who, as part of their duties at the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail, subjected plaintiff, and all those he represents, to pre-arraignment strip and/or visual body cavity searches without having, and recording in writing, a reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons.
5. At all material times mentioned herein, each of the defendants was acting under the color of law, to wit, under color of statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs and usages of the state of Arizona, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, and/or the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF=S DEPARTMENT.
3

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 4 of 16
6. Defendant SHERIFF ESTRADA was responsible for the screening, hiring, training, monitoring, supervision, and disciplining of subordinate employees of the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail and was the authority empowering the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY DEPUTIES to incarcerate prisoners under the jurisdiction of SANTA CRUZ COUNTY.
7. Defendant SHERIFF ESTRADA was responsible for administering the jail facilities and for making, overseeing, and implementing the policies, practices, and customs challenged herein relating to the operation of the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail.
8. Defendant SHERIFF ESTRADA, in his individual and official capacities, maintained or permitted an official policy or custom of causing or permitting the occurrence of the types of wrongs complained of herein, which wrongs damaged plaintiff and all those similarly situated as alleged herein.
9. Class action plaintiffs are those similarly situated who, during the period beginning two (2) years before the filing of this Complaint, and continuing to this date, were subjected by defendants to pre-arraignment strip and/or visual body cavity searches without defendants having, and recording in writing, a reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons.
III. FACTS 10. During the two (2) years preceding the filing of this Complaint, plaintiff GEORGE VICTOR GARCIA (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) was arrested on multiple occasions for minor offenses such as drinking in public, shoplifting, or disorderly conduct following which arrests he was transported to SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail where, prior to appearance before a judge for arraignment and without there being any reasonable suspicion that
4

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 5 of 16
he was concealing contraband, plaintiff, pursuant to policies, practices, and procedures of defendants, and each of them, was subjected to a visual body cavity search (strip search) in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Plaintiff was coerced, forced, and compelled to disrobe for the strip searches in areas that could be observed by persons who were not participating in the search and who included members of the opposite sex.
11. On each occasion, plaintiff was required to remove all of his clothes, lift his genitals, bend over to expose his anus for inspection, individually, and in groups of other detainees.
12. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that defendants routinely follow their policy, practice, and custom of subjecting pre-arraignment detainees, including plaintiff, and all those he represents, to strip and visual body cavity searches without first having, and recording in writing, a reasonable suspicion that the searches will be productive of contraband or weapons; and that such searches are generally conducted both in groups and in areas where the searches can be and are observed by persons not participating in the searches, including guards of the sex opposite to those who are being searched.
13. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that defendants have the ability to identify all such similarly situated plaintiffs, specifically those who, while in defendants= custody at the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail within two (2) years prior to the filing of this Complaint, were subjected to strip searches and/or visual body cavity searches prior to
arraignment without defendants first having, and recording, a reasonable suspicion that the
5

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 6 of 16
searches would be productive of contraband or weapons. 14. Defendant SANTA CRUZ COUNTY and SHERIFF ESTRADA are personally
responsible for the promulgation and continuation of the strip search policy, practice, and custom pursuant to which plaintiff, and those he represents, were subjected to strip searches.
15. As a result of being subjected to the strip searches complained of herein, plaintiff, and each of the persons similarly situated, suffered physical, mental, and emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and violation of due process of law and federal statutory and constitutional rights, and are entitled to recover damages according to proof.
IV. CLASS CLAIMS 16. The strip and visual body cavity searches to which plaintiff, and all those similarly situated, were subjected were performed pursuant to policies, practices, and customs of defendants SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, SHERIFF ESTRADA, and SHERIFF=S DEPUTIES sued herein by the fictitious names 1 through 50. The searches complained of herein were performed without regard to the nature of the alleged offenses for which plaintiff, and all those similarly situated, had been arrested, without regard to whether or not plaintiff, and all those he represents, were eligible for cite and release, without regard to whether or not plaintiff, and those similarly situated, were eligible for and/or were released on his or her own recognizance, or on bail. Furthermore, the searches complained of herein were performed without defendants having a reasonable belief that the plaintiff, or any of those similarly situated, so searched possessed weapons or contraband, and those facts being articulated and recorded in a supervisor-approved document. And the searches complained of herein were performed without defendants taking reasonable precautions to make certain that plaintiff, and each of those similarly situated, were
6

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 7 of 16
not observed by others not involved in the search. 17. Plaintiff brings this action on his own behalf and on behalf of all persons similarly
situated pursuant to Rule 23, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 18. The class of plaintiffs is defined to include all persons arrested on charges not
involving violence, drugs or weapons who, in the period from and including two (2) years prior to the filing of this Complaint, and continuing until this matter is adjudicated and the practices complained of herein cease, were arrested and subjected to a pre-arraignment strip and/or visual body cavity search at the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail without defendants first having, and recording in writing, a reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons.
19. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(a), the members of the class are so numerous that joinder of all members is impractical. Plaintiff does not know the exact number of class members. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that there are more than 10 persons per day who are arrested by defendants and/or are in the custody of defendants who are and have been subjected to the searches complained of herein as a result of defendants= policy, practice, and custom relating to said searches.
20. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(a), plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that there are many questions of fact common to the class including, but not limited to: (1) whether defendants routinely subject all persons arrested to visual body cavity searches prior to arraignment if they intend such persons to be housed in the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail; (2) whether persons are subjected to strip and/or visual body cavity searches prior to arraignment without there being any reasonable suspicion,
7

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 8 of 16
based on specific or articulable facts, to believe any particular arrestee has concealed drugs, weapons, and/or contraband in bodily cavities which could be detected by means of a strip and/or visual body cavity search; (3) whether the strip and/or visual body cavity searches are conducted in an area of privacy so that the searches cannot be observed by persons not participating in the searches; (4) whether the strip and/or visual body cavity searches are performed in groups; and (5) whether the strip and/or visual body cavity searches are reasonably related to defendants= penological interest to maintain the security of the jail and whether or not there are less intrusive methods for protecting any such interest.
21. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(a), plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that there are many questions of law common to the class including, but not limited to: (1) whether defendants may perform strip and/or visual body cavity searches on persons prior to their arraignment without reasonable suspicion, based on specific or articulable facts, to believe any particular prearraignment detainee has concealed drugs, weapons and/or contraband which would likely be discovered by a strip and/or visual body cavity search; (2) whether defendants may perform strip and/or visual body cavity searches on persons without first reasonably relating the strip search of the subject to defendants= penological interest to maintain the security of the jail and determining if there is a less intrusive method to protect that interest; (3) whether strip and/or visual body cavity searches may be conducted in areas where the search can be observed by persons not participating in the search without violating plaintiffs= Federal constitutional and statutory rights; (4) whether or not defendants= may strip search persons in groups in accordance with the Federal constitution; and (5) whether or not defendants have immunity or qualified immunity defenses to plaintiff=s
8

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 9 of 16
claims. 22. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(a), the claims of the
representative plaintiff is typical of the class. Plaintiff was arrested on minor offenses not involving violence, drugs or weapons and was searched, prior to arraignment, without defendants having a reasonable suspicion that a strip or visual body cavity search would produce drugs, weapons or contraband (and without the facts supporting any such suspicion being articulated in a supervisor-approved writing). Representative plaintiff has the same interests and suffered the same type of injuries as did all of the other class members. Plaintiff=s claims arose because of defendants= policy, practice, and custom of subjecting arrestees to strip and/or visual body cavity searches before arraignment without having, and recording in writing, a reasonable suspicion that the search would be productive of contraband or weapons. Each class member suffered actual damages as a result of being subjected to a strip and/or visual body cavity search. The actual damages suffered by the representative plaintiff is similar in type and amount to the actual damages suffered by each class member.
23. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(a), the representative plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the class interests. Plaintiff=s interests are consistent with and not antagonistic to the interests of the class.
24. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(b)(1)(A), prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the class would create a risk that inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the class would establish incompatible standards of conduct for the parties opposing the complaint.
25. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(b)(1)(B),
9

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 10 of 16
prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the class would create a risk of inconsistent adjudications with respect to individual members of the class which would, as a practical matter, substantially impair or impede the interests of the other members of the class to protect their interests.
26. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(b)(2), plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to the class, thereby making appropriate the final injunctive or declaratory relief with respect to the class as a whole.
27. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(b)(3), this class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and equitable adjudication of the controversy between the parties. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that the interests of members of the class in individually controlling the prosecution of a separate action is low, in that most class members would be unable individually to prosecute any action at all. Plaintiff also is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that the amounts at stake for individuals are so small that separate suits would be impracticable. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that most members of the class will not be able to find counsel to represent them. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that it is desirable to concentrate all litigation in one forum because all of the claims arise in the same location; i.e., the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail. It will promote judicial efficiency to resolve the common questions of law and fact in one forum, rather than in multiple courts.
28. Plaintiff does not know the identities of all of the class members. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that the identities of the class members may be
10

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 11 of 16
ascertained from records maintained by defendants SANTA CRUZ COUNTY and SHERIFF ESTRADA. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that defendants= records reflect the identities, including addresses and telephone numbers, of the persons who have been held in custody in the SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Jail. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that records of, and maintained by defendants reflect who was subject to a strip and/or visual body cavity search, when the search occurred, where the search occurred, whether any reasonable suspicion for the search existed and was recorded in a supervisorapproved writing, whether the search was videotaped, when persons searched were arraigned, and the charges on which such persons were arrested. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that all of the foregoing information is contained in defendants= computer system and that the information necessary to identify the class members, by last known addresses, and the dates and reasons for their arrests and/or release from custody, is readily available from said computer system.
29. In accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(c)(2)(b), class members must be furnished with the best notice practicable under the circumstances, including individual notice to all members who can be identified through reasonable effort. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that defendants= computer records contain a last known address for class members. Plaintiff contemplates that individual notice will be given to class members at such last known address by first class mail. Plaintiff contemplates that the notice will inform class members of the following:
i. The pendency of the class action and the issues common to the class; ii. The nature of the action;
11

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 12 of 16
iii. Their right to Aopt out@ of the action within a given time, in which event they will not be bound by a decision rendered in the class action;
iv. Their right, if they do not Aopt out,@ to be represented by their own counsel and to enter an appearance in the case; otherwise they will be represented by the named class plaintiff and the named class plaintiff=s counsel; and
v. Their right, if they do not Aopt out,@ to share in any recovery in favor of the class, and conversely to be bound by any judgment on the common issues adverse to the class. V. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Civil Rights Violations Under 42 USC ' 1983)
30. Plaintiff incorporates by reference into this cause of action the allegations in each of the preceding paragraphs, as fully as if realleged and set forth herein.
31. Defendants= policies, practices, and customs regarding the strip and visual body cavity searches complained of herein violated plaintiff=s, and all those similarly situated=s, clearly established rights under the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, violated plaintiff=s, and all those similarly situated=s, clearly established rights to due process and privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment, and directly and proximately damaged plaintiff, and all those similarly situated, as herein alleged, entitling plaintiff, and all class members, to recover damages for said constitutional violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for relief, for himself and for all persons similarly situated, as hereunder appears.
12

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 13 of 16
VI. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Declaratory and Injunctive Relief)
32. Plaintiff incorporates by reference into his second cause of action the allegations of the preceding paragraphs, as fully as if realleged and set forth herein.
33. Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and the members of the class, seeks a judgment declaring that Defendants must cease the activities described herein and enjoining Defendants from any further strip searches without individualized reasonable suspicion.
34. The constitutional violations alleged herein arise from official policies and practices sanctioned by Defendants. The harm which plaintiff and the members of the class have sustained are clearly traceable to these officially sanctioned policies and procedures.
35. Plaintiff and members of the class do not have a plain, adequate, speedy, or complete remedy at law to address the wrongs alleged in this Complaint, and they will suffer irreparable injury as a result of Defendants= misconduct unless injunctive and declaratory relief is granted. Plaintiff and members of the class are in real and immediate danger of sustaining future, direct injury as a result of Defendants= official policies and practices that are ongoing at the time of this suit.
36. No cognizable burden will be placed on Defendants by requiring that no strip searches be undertaken without individualized reasonable suspicion. The public interest would be greatly enhanced by enforcement of policies and practices which adhere to the requirements of the state and federal Constitutions. Absent injunctive relief, there is no guarantee that the Defendants will cease their illegal policies and practices as alleged herein.
37. By reason of the foregoing, plaintiff and members of the class are entitled to
13

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 14 of 16
declaratory and injunctive relief as set forth above. VII.
DAMAGES 38. The above paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth in this paragraph. 39. As a direct and proximate result of the wrongful and unlawful actions of Defendants, described above, plaintiff and the members of the class were injured and have suffered and continue to suffer damages, including but not limited to distress, anguish, suffering, humiliation, deprivation of constitutional rights, and other incidental, consequential, and special damages. 40. Defendants= acts and omissions, as set forth herein, were malicious, reckless, wanton, oppressive, and/or fraudulent, justifying an award of punitive damages against the individually named defendants including SHERIFF ESTRADA and DOES 1 THROUGH 50 whose real names and identities will be substituted for the fictitious names stated herein as soon as said names are determined, for the purpose of punishment and to deter others from the commission of like offenses.
VIII. PRAYER WHEREFORE, plaintiff, on behalf of himself and on behalf of the members of the class represented herein, respectfully prays for and demands judgment against the Defendants as follows: (a) For judgment against defendants for compensatory damages, special damages, consequential damages and incidental damages under any or all
14

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 15 of 16
of the causes of action, in an amount to be determined at the trial of this cause; (b) For judgment declaring the rights of the parties; (c) For injunctive relief; (d) For reasonable attorneys= fees and costs incurred herein; (e) For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest in amounts to be determined according to law; (f) For an award of punitive and exemplary damages, in an amount to be determined at the trial of this cause; and (g) For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
/// JURY TRIAL REQUEST
COMES NOW plaintiff GEORGE VICTOR GARCIA, by and through his counsel, below listed, on his own behalf and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons, and hereby demands trial by jury pursuant to the terms and conditions of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 38, in regard to all issues in the above-referenced cause.

DATED: February 25, 2008

Respectfully submitted,
15

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 16 of 16
By:__Electronically Signed 2/25/08 Mark E. Merin, SBN 43849 Joshua Kaizuka, SBN 212195 Cathleen A. Williams, SBN 68029 LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 443-6911 - Telephone (916) 447-8336 - Facsimile mark@markmerin.com - E-mail
Andrew C. Schwartz, SBN 64578 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK 2121 N California Boulevard, Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 947-1147 - Telephone (925) 947-1131 - Facsimile schwartz@cmslaw.com - E-mail
Eric N. Dahlstrom, SBN 004680 Michael Shiel, SBN 006968 Robert R. Rothstein, SBN 2287 ROTHSTEIN, DONATELLI, HUGHES, DAHLSTROM, SCHOENBURG & BIENVENU, LLP 80 E. Rio Salado Parkway, Suite 305 Tempe, AZ 85281 (480) 921-9296 - Telephone (480) 921-9249 – Facsimile edahlstrom@rothsteinlaw.com – E-mail mshiel@rothsteinlaw.com – E-mail rrr@rothsteinlaw.com - E-mail
Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class
16

 
 Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 1 of 29
EXHIBIT 1

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 2 of 29

THE FLEISCHMAN LAW FIRM, P.C.

2850 North Swan Road, Suite 120

Tucson, Arizona 85712-6302

phone: (52D) 326-6400 - Fax: (520) 326-0200

CASE NAME:

GilL) '" \f (/\C"110 C! u~

FILE NO:

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

The parties having attended a mediation/settlement conference

this date, and the matter having settled, pursuant to Rule 80(d),

I the following terms are agreed upon, including attorney fees and

costs:

\

re c(r/t/l", 0dr.,~J-\\-\t-'~j (c".II'lLftfV(ily,JJvO',\1(\'-OO\ Df6

Each side to bear their own attorneys' fees and court costs.

The parties shall provide a settlement agreement and/or releases as required and agreed between them. By signing this document, the parties agree to be bound by the terms set forth herein, and further agree that The Fleischman Law Firm, P.C. shall inform the Court that the matter has settled and that a Stipulation
and orderA Dismiss~~h prejudice r~~~j be forthco~r'

DA~D/this
/ /'

I day of

\J '
f

, 20 " .

flator

Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 3 of 29

l Georgia A. Staton, Bar #004863 Russell R. Yurk, Bar #019377
2 Lisa S. Wahlin, Bar #013979 JONES, SKELTON & HOCHULI, P.L.C.
3 2901 North Central Avenue, Suite 800 Phoenix, Arizona 85012
4 Telephone: (602) 263-1700 Fax: (602) 200-7854
5 gstaton@jshfrrm.com ryurk@Jshfirm.com
6 lwahlinial.jshfirm.com Attorneys for Defendants Santa Cruz County;
7 Santa Cruz County Sheriff Tony Estrada; Santa Cruz County SheriffDeputies Does 1
8 through 50 inclusive

9 Mark E. Merin, Esq. Joshua Kaizuka, Esq.
10 Cathleen A. Williams, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN
11 2001 P Street Suite 100
12 Sacramento, CA 95814 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
13 916-443-6911

14 Robert R. Rothstein, Esq.
ROTHSTEIN, DONATELLI, HUGHES, 15 DAHLSTROM SCHOENBURG &
BIENVENU, LLP
16 1215 Paseo De Peralta P. O. Box 8180
17 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504 Attorney for Plaintiffs
18 505-988-8004

19 Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ &
20 COOK 2121 North California Boulevard
21 Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596
22 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 925-947-1147
23

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 24

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 25

GEORGE VICTOR GARCIA, on behalf of 26 himself and the class of similarly situated
persons, 27

NO. CV 08-00139-TUC-RCC STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT

Plaintiffs, 28

1989906-1

I

1990272.1

11/25/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 4 of 29

1 v.
2 SANTA CRUZ COUNTY; SANTA CRUZ
3 COUNTY SHERIFF TONY ESTRADA, in his individual and official capacities; SANTA
4 CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF DEPUTIES DOES 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE,
5 Defendants.
6

7

Plaintiff GEORGE VICTOR GARCIA ("Garcia"), on behalf of himself and

8 on behalf of the Settlement Class defined herein, and Defendants SANTA CRUZ

9 COUNTY and SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF TONY ESTRADA, in his individual

10 and official capacities, (hereinafter collectively referred to as "County"), by and through

11 their respective counsel, hereby submit the following Stipulation of Settlement.

12

L

13

RECITALS

14

On or about February 25, 2008, Garcia filed a Class Action Complaint

15 against Defendants seeking damages, declaratory and injunctive relief. The complaint

16 alleged that the County's practices relating to strip searching certain arrestees and inmates

17 violated rights of these individuals guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the United

18 States, in several respects: the complaint alleged that blanket strip searches were being

19 performed on pre-arraignment arrestees for whom there was no reasonable suspicion that

20 they may be attempting to conceal contraband or weapons and the strip searches were

21 conducted; in an area where others, not participating in the searches, could observe the

22 persons being strip searched and who included members of the opposite sex.

23

The Parties conducted discovery that included exchange of documents,

24 interrogatories, depositions, and inspection of the County's jail facilities.

25

As the result of the filing of this Class Action Complaint, the Sheriffs

26 Office issued revised strip search policies. Plaintiff is satisfied that, as of August 26, 2008,

27 the Sheriffs Office strip search policies are essentially in conformity with federal law.

28

1989906-1

2

1990272.1

11125/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 5 of 29

1

On November 24 and 25, 2008 the Parties participated in mediation sessions

2 presided over by the Honorable Lawrence Fleischman (Pima County Superior Court

3 judge, retired) and agreed to this Stipulation of Settlement which, subject to the approval

4 of the Court, settles this action in the manner and upon the terms set forth below and fully

5 resolves the dispute.

6

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by

7 and between the Parties as follows:

8

II.

9

DEFINITIONS

10

1. "Administrator" means Gilardi and Co., LLC, P. O. Box 1110, Corte

11 Madera, California, 94976-1110, to be appointed by the Court to provide notice to the

12 members of the class and to review and determine the validity and value of claims

13 submitted by Settlement Class Members ("SCMs"), according to the procedures set forth

14 herein.

15

2. The "Bar Date" is the date established by the Court by which any

16 SCM who wishes to receive payment pursuant to the Stipulation of Settlement must file
I
17 hislher Claim Form(s), objections to this Stipulation of Settlement, or request to be

18 excluded from the class ("OPT-OUT"). The Bar Date shall be one hundred and twenty

19 (120) days after the Class Notice (defined below) is first published in a newspaper serving

20 the Santa Cruz County area.

21

3. "Charge List" means the list of charges attached hereto as Exhibit 1

22 and/or comparable federal charges.

23

4. The "Claim Form" is the form required to make a claim for payment

24 under this settlement. A copy of the proposed Claim Form is attached as Exhibit 2.

25

5. "Class Counsel" means collectively The Law Office of Mark E.

26 Merin, and Mark E. Merin, Robert R. Rothstein, Esq., Rothstein, Donatelli, Hughes,

27 Dahlstrom, Schoenburg & Bienvenu, LLP, and Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq., Casper,

28 Meadows, Schwartz & Cook.

1989906-1

3

1990272.1

1lI25!08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 6 of 29

1

6. The "Class Notice" means the notice in the form attached hereto as

2 Exhibit 3 (Notice by Mail) and includes such other summary notice(s) to be published in

3 newspapers serving the Santa Cruz County area.

4

7. The "Class Period" is February 25, 2006 through and including

5 August 26, 2008.

6

8. The "Database" is the information provided in hard copy and/or

7 electronic form by County to the Administrator and Class Counsel which includes, to the

8 extent practicable, the name, last known address(es), date(s) of birth, social security

9 number(s), date(s) of booking, charge(s); date(s) of arrests prior to the Class Period (if

10 any).

II

9. The "Effective Date" means the date upon which a judgment entered

12 by the Court approving the Stipulation of Settlement becomes final. The judgment will be

13 deemed final only upon expiration of the time to appeal or, if a Notice of Appeal is filed,

14 upon exhaustion of all appeals and petitions for Writs of Certiorari.

15

10. "Non-VDW Offense" means a felony or misdemeanor charge, I

16 infraction, ordinance or lesser charge not listed on the Charge List.

17

II. "VDW Offense" means a felony or misdemeanor charge, infraction,

18 ordinance or lesser charge listed on the Charge List or a comparable federal charge.

19

12. An "Opt-Out" is any potential SCM who files a timely request for

20 exclusion as specified in Paragraph 2.

21

13. "Released Persons" means SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, all of its agencies,

22 departments and divisions, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF TONY ESTRADA, and

23 their predecessors, successors, and/or assigns, together with past, present, and future

24 officials, employees, representatives, attorneys and/or agents of SANTA CRUZ

25 COUNTY or the Santa Cruz County Sheriffs Department, including but not limited to all

26 employees of the Santa Cruz County Jail.

27

28

1989906·1

4

1990272.1

11125/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 7 of 29

1

14. The "Settlement Class" means all of those persons who during the

2 Class Period, were booked at the Santa Cruz County Jail and strip searched at that facility ,

3 prior to arraignment on the charges for which they were booked.

4

15. "Strip Search," as used in this Stipulation of Settlement, means a

5 search that requires a person to remove or arrange some or all of his or her clothing so as

6 to permit a visual inspection of the breasts, buttocks, or genitalia of such person.

7

16. A "Settlement Class Member" ("SCM") means any member of the

8 Settlement Class, including representatives, successors and assigns, who does not file a

9 valid and timely Request for Exclusion as provided in Paragraph 2 of this Stipulation of

10 Settlement.

11

17. "Special Master" shall mean Lawrence Fleischman. The Special

12 Master shall have the power to make decisions III all matters pertaining to the

13 administration and enforcement of the Stipulation of Settlement, and to resolve all

14 disputes between the Parties pertaining to the Stipulation of Settlement. All fees and

15 expenses of the Special Master shall be paid from funds allocated for Claims

16 Administration.

17

III.

18

TERMS AND EFFECT OF STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT

19

18. This Stipulation of Settlement is for settlement purposes only, and

20 neither the fact of, nor any provision contained in this Stipulation of Settlement or its

21 exhibits, nor any action taken hereunder shall constitute, be construed as, or be admissible

22 in evidence as any admission of the validity of any claim or any fact alleged by the
23 Plaintiff or SCMs in this action or in any other pending action of any wrongdoing, fault, I

24 violation of law, or liability of any kind on the part of Defendants or admission by

25 Defendants of any claim or allegation made in this action or in any other action, nor as an

26 admission by the Plaintiff, SCMs or Class Counsel of the validity of any fact or defense

27 asserted against them in this action or in any other action. Defendants deny all allegations

28 of wrongdoing and deny any liability to Plaintiff or to any other Class Members. The

1989906-1

5

1990272.1

11125/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 8 of 29

1 Parties have agreed that, in order to avoid long and costly litigation, this controversy

2 should be settled pursuant to the terms of this settlement, subject to the approval of the

3 Court.

4

19. The Santa Cruz County Sheriffs Department shall provide a database

5 to class counsel and the claims administrator which contains the name, last known

6 addressees), and other necessary personal information of all SCMs. This personal and

7 criminal history information, which is included in the Database, is considered privileged

8 and confidential, and will remain as such notwithstanding transmission to Class Counsel

9 and the Claims Administrator or the Claims Administrator's agents. The parties will use

10 this personal and criminal history information only for purposes of satisfYing their rights,

II duties, and obligations under this Stipulation of Settlement. After all SCMs have been

12 paid pursuant to this Stipulation of Settlement, Class Counsel and the Claims

13 Administrator will assure that all personal and criminal history information contained in

14 the Database and obtained pursuant to this paragraph will be destroyed. The County and

15 Santa Cruz County Sheriffs Department, shall be immune from any civil liability

16 associated with obtaining the personal and criminal history information discussed herein

17 and transmitting it to Class Counsel and the Claims Administrator or its agents. No SCM

18 shall be permitted to sue the County, the Santa Cruz County Sheriffs Department, alleged

19 damages associated with the disclosure of the personal or criminal history information

20 discussed in this paragraph, and any such claims are hereby considered released per

21 Paragraphs 25 and 28 of this Stipulation of Settlement.

22

20. On or about the Effective Date, the Parties will submit all appropriate

23 papers to dismiss Case No. CV 08-00139-TUC-RCC in the United States District Court

24 for the District of Arizona.

25

21. The Parties agree, solely for the purpose of this settlement and its

26 implementation, that the action shall proceed as a class action, with the Settlement Class

27 as defined in Paragraph 14, and that attorneys for the Settlement Class are Class Counsel

28 as defined in Paragraph 5; but if such settlement fails to be approved or otherwise fails to

1989906-1

6

1990272.1

11125108

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 9 of 29

1 be consummated, then this Stipulation of Settlement is hereby withdrawn.

2

22. SCMs who comply with the requirements set forth in this Stipulation

3 of Settlement will be paid specified sums determined by the procedures set forth herein in

4 full satisfaction of all claims.

5

23. This Stipulation of Settlement, as of the Effective Date, resolves in

6 full all claims against the Released Persons by Garcia and all of the SCMs, involving

7 alleged violations of their rights guaranteed by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to

8 the United States Constitution, or any other federal, state or local law, regulation, duty or

9 obligation which are based upon, or could be based upon, or arise from the facts alleged in

10 the complaint for damages filed in Case No. CV08-00139-TUC-RCC in the United States

II District Court, for the District of Arizona. When the Stipulation of Settlement is final, as

12 of the Effective Date, all SCMs and Garcia hereby release all such claims.

13

24. The Parties agree that the Court, by preliminarily approving the

14 Stipulation of Settlement, will be certifYing the Settlement Class as defined in Paragraph

15 14 as the Settlement Class, subject to final approval of the settlement at the Fairness

16 Hearing, and that the Court shall retain exclusive and continuing jurisdiction of the action,

17 Parties, SCMs, Special Master and the Administrator to interpret and enforce the terms,

18 conditions and obligations under this agreement.

19

25. This is a full and final Release applying to all unknown and

20 unanticipated injuries, deaths or damages arising out of the events described in the

21 Complaint in Case No. CV08-00139-TUC-RCC filed in the United States District Court

22 for the District of Arizona, as well as those now known or disclosed.

23

26. As of the Effective Date of this Stipulation of Settlement, the SCMs,

24 including Garcia, hereby waive any and all rights to pursue, initiate, prosecute, or

25 commence any action or proceeding before any Court, administrative agency or other

26 tribunal, or to file any complaint with regard to acts of commission or omission by the

27 Released Persons respecting such SCMs with respect to any strip search by Defendants

28 during their confinement at any of the County's jail facilities which occurred during the

1989906-1

7

1990272.1

11125/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 10 of 29

1 Class Period.

2

27. This Stipulation of Settlement contains all of the terms and

3 conditions agreed upon by the Parties hereto regarding the subject matter of the instant

4 proceeding, and no oral agreement entered into at any time nor any written agreement

5 entered into prior to the execution of this Stipulation of Settlement shall be deemed to

6 exist, or to bind the Parties hereto, or to vary the terms and conditions contained herein,

7 except as expressly provided herein.

8

28. Each SCM shall be deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of

9 the Court.

10

29. No Opt-Out shall share in any monetary benefits provided by this

11 Stipulation of Settlement.

12

30. This agreement is subject to and conditioned upon the final approval

13 of this Stipulation of Settlement and the issuance of the final order and judgment of

14 dismissal, by the United States District Court, District of Arizona, providing the below-

15 specified relief, which relief shall be pursuant to the terms and conditions of this

16 Stipulation of Settlement and the Parties' performance of their continuing obligations

17 hereunder. The order and judgment will be deemed fmal only upon expiration of the time

18 to appeal, or, if a Notice of Appeal is filed, upon exhaustion of all appeals and petitions

19 for writs of certiorari. Such final order and judgment shall:

20

a. Dismiss with prejudice all complaints in the action as to the Released

21 Persons;

22

b. Order that all SCMs are enjoined from asserting against any Released

23 Person any and all claims that the SCMs have, had, or may have in the future arising out

24 of the facts alleged in the Complaint;

25

c. Release each Released Person from the claims that any SCM has, had I

26 or may have in the future, against such Released Person arising out of the facts alleged in

27 the Complaint;

28

d. Determine that this Stipulation of Settlement is entered into in good

1989906·1

8

1990272.1

1lI25/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 11 of 29

1 faith, is reasonable, fair and adequate, and is in the best interest of the Class; and

2

e. Reserve the Court's continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over the

3 Parties to this Stipulation of Settlement, including Defendants and all SCMs, to

4 administer, supervise, construe and enforce the Stipulation of Settlement in accordance

5 with the terms for the mutual benefit of all the Parties.

6

31. The Parties will take all necessary and appropriate steps to obtain

7 preliminary approval of the Stipulation of Settlement, final approval of the settlement, and

8 dismissal of the action with prejudice. If the Court finally approves this Stipulation of

9 Settlement, and if there is an appeal from such decision, the Defendants will not oppose

10 Plaintiffs' efforts to defend the Stipulation of Settlement.

11

IV.

12

RESOLUTION AND PAYMENT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES

13

32. The Parties have agreed that certain sums will be paid by or on behalf

14 of the County to resolve all claims of all SCMs as described in Paragraph 14, and that the

15 total of all such sums shall not exceed Three Million One Hundred Eighty Seven

16 Thousand Three Hundred Dollars ($3,187,300.00) including the fees and costs of Class

17 Counsel and the cost of administration of this settlement.

18

33. Class Counsel and the SCMs, by and through Representative Plaintiff

19 Garcia, have determined that the following distribution of the sum described in Paragraph

20 32 is appropriate, in which determination the Released Persons acquiesce: (1) Up to Two

21 Million One Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand Three Hundred Dollars ($2,162,300.00)

22 will be allocated to pay verified claims of the SCMs; (2) Fifty Thousand Dollars

23 ($50,000.00) will be allocated to compensate Representative Plaintiff Garcia; (3) Seven

24 Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($725,000.00) will be allocated to pay Class

25 Counsel's fees and costs; (4) Up to Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00)

26 will be allocated to pay the costs of administration, including all notices to the classes and

27 processing, administration and payment of the SCMs' claims. Distribution of the

28 settlement amount is subject to the following terms and conditions of this Stipulation of

1989906·1

9

1990272.1

1II2S/0S

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 12 of 29

1 Settlement.

2

34. Within 30 days of preliminary approval by the United States District

3 Court of the terms of this Stipulation of Settlement, Defendants will certify that they have

4 sufficient funds available to them or on deposit to satisfy fully the terms of this Stipulation

5 of Settlement. If the total amount of all verified claims exceeds the amount of Two

6 Million One Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand Three Hundred Donars ($2,162,300.00)

7 the amount payable to SCMs for each claim shall be reduced proportionately so that the

8 entire amount, but no more than Two Million One Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand

9 Three Hundred Dollars ($2,162,300.00) is paid out to SCMs.

10

35. No payment shall be made to eligible SCMs before the Effective

11 Date. Claims may be processed between the date of preliminary Court approval and the

12 Effective Date. Claims will only be paid after all verified Claims have been calculated and

13 all disputes relating to Claims have been resolved.

14

36. No payment shall be paid to Class Counsel for fees and costs before

15 the Effective Date as more fully described in Paragraph 9.

16

37. Representative Plaintiff Garcia's payment of Fifty Thousand Dollars

17 ($50,000.00) shall be made to him, care of Class Counsel, within thirty (30) days of the

18 Effective Date.

19

38. The Parties agree to make an application to the Court to appoint the

20 Administrator as an officer of the Court for the purpose of implementing the terms of the

21 Stipulation of Settlement. The Administrator shall be subject to judicial immunity to the

22 fullest extent permitted by law.

23

V.

24

PROCEDURES FOR RECEIVING PAYMENT

UNDER THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 25

39. All members of the pre-arraignment strip search Class as defined in
26

Paragraph 14, booked during the Class Period, upon return of a verified Claim Form, shall 27

receive the following: 28

1989906-1

10

1990272.1

11/25/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 13 of 29

1

a. All non VDW offense SCMs excluding: 1) persons who, at the time

2 of such Class Period booking were on parole, 2) persons who, at the time of such

3 booking, were required to submit to a search of their person as a condition of probation,

4 and 3) persons who, at the time of such booking, had been arrested on a VDW during the

5 preceding seven (7) years who were strip-searched shall receive One Thousand Seven

6 Hundred Fifty Dollars ($1,750.00) for each booking, up to a maximum of two (2).

7

b. All SCMs arrested on non-VDW offenses who within seven (7) years

8 of such arrest had a prior arrest for VDW offenses shall be entitled to receive Thirty Five

9 Dollars ($35.00) per booking up to a maximum of two (2) bookings.

10

c. All SCMs arrested on a VDW offense shall be entitled to receive

11 Fifteen Dollars ($15.00).

12

40. In addition to the sums specified in Paragraph 39, all SCMs will

13 become eligible to receive additional sums, referred to as "Enhancements" of Two

14 Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00) for each applicable condition: (1) they were under 21

15 or over 60 at the time of the qualifying strip search; (2) had a physical or mental disability

16 at the time of strip search; and/or (3) were pregnant at the time of strip search.

17

41. In addition to the payments described in Paragraphs 39 and 40, SCMs

18 may become eligible to receive amounts, to be determined by negotiations between Class

19 Counsel and County's counsel, of not less than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) but

20 no more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) if, at the time they submit a timely

21 Claim Form to the Administrator, they also submit medical or psychological records or

22 reports from licensed physicians or psychologists, marriage and family counselors, or

23 clinical social workers establishing that, within 90 days after the strip search which is the

24 subject of their claim, they received treatment for a physical, emotional or psychological

25 injury caused by the strip search. All documentation of such claimed injuries will be

26 provided to counsel for the County, who will be afforded a reasonable period of time to

27 investigate each such claim, including taking depositions and obtaining additional records.

28 In the event that Class Counsel and County's counsel cannot agree on an amount to

1989906·1

11

1990272.1

11/25/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 14 of 29

1 resolve' the claim of any SCM described in this paragraph, all documentation pertaining

2 to that SCM's claim shall be submitted to the Special Master, along with each counsel's

3 proposed amount for an award, and the Special Master shall determine the amount of the

4 award, based upon the documents submitted to him.

5

42. The total of all payments described in Paragraphs 39 and 40, shall not

6 exceed the sum of Four Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,250.00).

7

43. The Administrator shall determine whether or not a person who

8 submitted a Claim Form is an SCM and shall reject claims from persons who are not

9 SCMs. In addition, the Administrator shall reject and exclude any claims from an SCM

10 who makes material false statements on a Claim Form.

I

I

11

44. After the final approval of the Stipulation of Settlement, as specified

12 in Paragraph 32, the Administrator will determine the total amount owed to all SCMs who

13 have filed valid Claim Forms. In the event that the total amount owed for claims made by

14 SCMs exceeds the amount of Two Million On Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand Three

15 Hundred Dollars ($2,162,300.00), the Administrator will reduce the amount which each

16 SCM will receive, proportionately, so that the total of all payments does not exceed the

17 maximum available payment for the claims. Upon determination of the total of all

18 amounts to be paid to all SCMs, the Administrator will notify the Parties of the amounts

19 necessary to satisfy all SCMs' claims and County will cause sufficient funds to be

20 deposited in the Administrator's account within thirty (30) days of such notice to permit

21 the Administrator to pay the verified claims

22

45. If the total amount of the verified claims of all SCMs does not exceed

23 Two Million One Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand Three Hundred Dollars

24 ($2,162,300.00), the difference between the total value of all such claims and Two

25 Million One Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand Three Hundred Dollars ($2,162,000.00),

26 shall not be paid pursuant to this Stipulation of Settlement.

27

46. Any SCM who fails to submit a Claim Form completed in

28 accordance with the instructions contained therein by the Bar Date or any other Court

1989906·1

12

1990272.1

11125108

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 15 of 29

1 mandated extension, shall be forever barred from receiving any payment pursuant to this

2 Stipulation of Settlement. Such SCM shall, in all other respects, be bound by all of the

3 terms and conditions of this Stipulation of Settlement, and the judgment entered herein,

4 including but not limited to the release of all Released Persons of all claims resolved

5 herein. The Administrator will determine the value to be assigned to the claim of each

6 eligible SCM based upon the Administrator's review of the Claim Forms and the

7 information in the database provided by Defendants.

8

VI.

9

GENERAL CLAIM PROCEDURES

10

47. To receive payment an SCM shall be required to submit to the

11 Administrator an executed Claim Form, signed under penalty of perjury.

12

48. The Claim Form shall be submitted by first class mail and shall be

13 deemed submitted upon the date of the postmark thereon.

14

49. SCMs who submit claims and whose names appear on the database

15 will be paid by mail at the address specified on the Claim Form. Payments which are

16 addressed to SCMs who are confined to the Santa Cruz County jail facility at the time of

17 payment will be deposited in that SCM's jail commissary account.

18

VII.

19

EXCLUSION FROM THE SETTLEMENT CLASS

20

50. Any potential SCM who wishes to be excluded from the Settlement

21 Classes described in Paragraph 14 must file a Request for Exclusion (Opt-Out) with the

22 Clerk of the Court, on or before the Bar Date or as the Court may otherwise direct.

23 Representative Plaintiff Garcia may not request exclusion pursuant to this paragraph. Any

24 potential SCM who does not timely file a Request for Exclusion shall conclusively be

25 deemed to have become an SCM and to be bound by this Stipulation of Settlement and by

26 all subsequent proceedings, orders, and judgments herein.

27

51. Any SCM who does not elect to be excluded from the Settlement

28 Class may, but need not, enter an appearance through his or her own attorney. SCMs who

1989906·1

13

1990272.1

11125108

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 16 of 29

1 do not enter an appearance will be represented by Class Counsel.

2

52. The County may, in its sole discretion, withdraw from the Stipulation

3 of Settlement if the number of Opt-Outs exceeds fifteen (15). The County will advise the

4 Court of its election no less than fifteen (15) days after receipt of notice of the number of 5 opt-outs following the Bar date. If the County withdraws pursuant to this provision of this

6 Stipulation of Settlement, the Stipulation of Settlement will be null and void.

7

"III

8

OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT

9

53. Any SCM who does not elect to be excluded from the Settlement

10 Class may, but need not, submit comments or objections to the proposed settlement. The 11 Court will enter an appropriate order setting forth the procedure for SCMs to submit

12 comments or objections to the proposed settlement.

13

IX.

14

ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS

15

54. Class Counsel shall receive a total award of Seven Hundred

16 Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($725,000.00) for attorneys' fees, costs and expenses

17 incident to prosecuting this action, which includes any costs and fees incurred in seeking

18 final approval of this StipUlation of Settlement and the defense thereof in any Court or

19 jurisdiction. Payment will be made as follows: Four Hundred Thousand Dollars

20 ($400,000.00) will be paid within Thirty (30) days of the Effective Date by check made 21 payable to Mark E. Merin and delivered to Law Office of Mark E. Merin, 2001 P Street,

22 Suite 100, Sacramento, California 95814. The remaining Three Hundred Twenty-Five

23 Thousand Dollars ($325,000.00) will be paid at the time of distribution of settlement

24 funds to the SCMs by delivery of a check made payable and delivered as specified above.

25 This award is subject to the approval of the Court. 26

27 28

1989906-1

14

1990272.1

11125/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 17 of 29

1

X.

2

NOTICE

3

55. Notice to SCMs defined in Paragraph 14, including a Claim Form

4 with a postage pre-paid return envelope, shall be by first class mail, postage prepaid, to all

5 individuals whose addresses are on record in databases maintained by the Santa Cruz

6 County Sheriffs Office or to such other, better addresses identified by the Administrator.

7 Such information will be provided to the Administrator as referenced in Paragraph 19.

8 Both Parties and the Administrator will exercise their best efforts to update and to verifY

9 addresses, including but not limited to addresses of SCMs who are incarcerated. Ibis

10 paragraph shall not limit further appropriate efforts to provide notice.

11

56. Follow-up reminder post cards shall be delivered by first class mail

12 45 days after initial notice is given to the last known address of all SCMs who have not

13 returned a Claim Form by that date. Such reminder post cards need not be sent to SCMs

14 whose original notice and Claim Form were returned as undeliverable by the United

15 States Postal Service and for whom the Administrator has no alternative address.

16

57. The Administrator shall cause a summary notice in English and

17 Spanish to be published in the Nogales International Newspaper and in such free

18 additional publications calculated to reach the SCMs, once per week in each of three

19 consecutive weeks, in a form and manner agreed to by the Parties, describing this

20 settlement, the claims procedure, and the procedure to object and/or to Opt-Out of the

21 settlement. If the Parties caunot agree on the wording of the summary notice, the Special

22 Master will determine the content of the summary notice to be published. Copies of the

23 summary notice shall be posted in the Santa Cruz County Jail in areas accessible to

24 detainees during the Claims Period.

25

58. Announcements summarizing the proposed settlement in English and

26 Spanish will be made on La Maxima at least three (3) times during a week for three

27 consecutive weeks.

28

1989906-1

15

1990272.1

lI/25/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 18 of 29

1

XI.

2

ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS

3

59. The terms and conditions of the administration agreement shall be

4 subject to mutual approval by counsel for the Plaintiffs and the Santa Cruz County

5 Defendants, but all parties shall cooperate in good faith. All reasonable costs incurred in

6 the administration of this Stipulation of Settlement including but not limited to, the fees of

7 the Administrator, costs of disseminating notice to Class Members by mail, publication, or

8 other means agreed to by the Parties, costs of producing Notice to be posted, costs of

9 reviewing and evaluating claims, including the cost of distribution of the monetary

10 payments to the class members, fees of the Special Master for services rendered in

11 connection with Paragraph 17, and any additional ancillary administration fees, will be

12 paid up to the total amount of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00)

13 allocated for these expenses.

14

60. Following preliminary Court approval of the Stipulation of

15 Settlement, the Administrator shall submit monthly invoices to the Arizona Counties

16 Insurance Pool, 1905 West Washington Street, Suite 200, Phoenix, Arizona 85009 with

17 copies to Class Counsel and the County's Counsel, for services rendered and for expense

18 reimbursement. All invoices will indicate the dates upon which services were performed,

19 the titles of the employees performing the services, the number of hours worked by each

20 title on each date, the hourly rate for each such title, and the total fee for the services

21 performed. The rates will be in accordance with the agreement between the Parties and the

22 Claims Administrator.

23

61. In the event that the total charges against the Administration Fund do

24 not exceed Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00) after all Claims have

25 been paid, and all Administration has been completed, any remaining funds allocated for

26 Claims Administration under this Stipulation of Settlement will be considered discharged

27 and not payable.

28

1989906-1

16

1990272.1

11125/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 19 of 29

1

-- DATED thI.s 2::> day of ,J'VI iz' .,2008.

2

JONES, SKELTON & HOCHULI, P.L.C.

/

3 4

Jet:: h= 4~~A iT ~.
By Geotgm . S4taton

I

f

!/ f

!'

5

~-~u~ellFl. )Turk

LISi S. Wahlin

6

2901 North Central Avenue, Suite 800

Phoenix, Arizona 85012

7

Attorneys for Defendants Santa Cruz

County; Santa Cruz County Sheriff Tony

8

Estrada; Santa Cruz County Sheriff

Deputies Does 1 through 50 inclusive

9

10

DATED this 2S/-h day of _ _);_'_fv_i)(,--'-(ft_,p-_ --'.(y_ _ _, 2008.

11

LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERlN

12

i

13

I '~~_~r-_

By

//

'='

14

Mark'E:Merin, Esq.

Joshua Kaizuka, Esq.

15

Cathleen A. Williams, Esq.

LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERlN

16

200 I P Street

Suite 100

17

Sacramento, CA 95814

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1989906-1

17

1990272.1

lI/25!08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 20 of 29

1

ORIGINAL electronically filed

2 this

day of

, 2008.

3 COPY mailed/e-mailed

4 this

day of _ _ _ _, 2008, to:

5

Hon. Raner C. Collins United States District Court

6

Evo A. DeConcini U.S. Courthouse 405 West Congress Street

7

Suite 6170 Tucson,PLZ 85701-5051

8 520-205-4540

9

Robert R. Rothstein, Esq. ROTHSTEIN, DONATELLI, HUGHES,

10

DAHLSTROM SCHOENBURG & BIENVENU, LLP

11

1215 Paseo De Peralta P. O. Box 8180

12

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504 Attorney for Plaintiffs

13 505-988-8004

14

Mark E. Merin, Esq. Joshua Kaizuka, Esq.

15

Cathleen A. Williams, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN

16

200 I P Street Suite 100

17

Sacramento, CA 95814 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

18 916-443-6911

19

Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. CAPSER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK

20

2121 North California Boulevard Suite 1020

21

Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

22 925-947-1147

23

24

25

26

27

28

1989906-1

18

1990272.1

11125/08

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 21 of 29
EXHIBIT 1

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 22 of 29
VDW Misdemeanor Offenses
13-1201 Endangennent 13-1203 Assault 1XX3X-X1X2X0X8XXXAXXsXsXaXuXlXtX; XvXiXcXiXoXuXXsXaXnXXimXXaXlXs 13-2402 Obstructing governmental operations 13-2409 Obstructing criminal investigations or prosecutions 13-2904 Disorderly conduct involvmg fighting 13-3102 Misconduct involving weapons 13-3112 Concealed weapons 13-3404.01 Possession or sale of precursor chemicals 13-3406 PossessIon, use, admimstration, acquisition, sale, manufacture or transportation of
prescription-only drugs 13-3456 PossessIon or possession with intent to use imItation controlled substance 13-3457 Possession or possession with intent [Q use imitation prescription-only drug 13-3458 Possession or possession with intent to use imItation over-the-counter drug 17-312 Misuse of firearms
VDW Felony Offenses
13-1102 Negligent homICide 13-1103 Manslaughter 13-1104 Second degree murder 13-1105 Firstdegreemurder 13-1204 Aggravated assault 13-1205 Unlawfully administering intoxicating liquors, narcotic or dangerous drugs 13-1206 Dangerous or deadly assault by a prisoner or juvemle 13-1207 Prisoners who commIt assault with intent to mcite to riot or partiCipate in riot 13- I 209 Drive-by shooting 13-1211 Discharging a fireann at a structure 13-1212 Prisoner assault with bodily fluiids 13-1423 Violent sexual assault 13-1902 Robbery 13-1903 Aggravaled robbery 13-1904 Anned robbery 13-2504 Escape m the first degree 13-2903 Riot 13-2904 Disorderly conduct involving the display ofa deadly weapon 13-3102 Misconduct involving weapons 13-3107 Unlawful discharge offireanns 13-3115 Adjudicated delinquents firearm possession 13-3402 Possession and sale of peyote 13-3403 Possession and sale o1'a vapor-releasing substance 13-3403.01 Nitrous oxide containers; sale to minors 13-3404.01 Possession or sale of precursor chemicals
19817~7 1

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 23 of 29 13-3405 Possession, use, productIOn, sale or transportation of marijuana 13-3406 Possession, use, admmistration, acqUIsition, sale, manufacture or transportation of
prescription-only drugs 13-3407 Possession, use, administration, acquisition, sale, manufacture or transportation of
dangerous drugs 13-3408 Possession, use, admmistration, acquisition, sale, manufacture or transportation of
narcotic drugs 13-3453 Manufacture or distribution of imitation controlled substance 13-3454 Manufacture or distribution of imitation prescription-only drug 13-3455 Manufacture or distribution of imHation over-the-counter drug
1981747 j

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 24 of 29
EXHIBIT 2

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 25 of 29

CLAIM FORM
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY STRIP SEARCH LAWSUIT CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM GARCIA V. COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, ET AL.
U.S. DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF ARIZONA CASE NO. CV 08-00139-TUC-RCC

Must be Postmarked by MAY 16, 2009
GARCIA1

FILL OUT THIS FORM IF:
YOU WERE BOOKED AT ANY TIME DURING THE PERIOD FROM AND INCLUDING FEBRUARY 25, 2006, T HROUGH AND INCLUDING AUGUST 26, 200 8, AND WERE STRIP SEARCHED, PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT, AT ANY SANTA CRUZ COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY. CLASS MEMBERS WHO QUALIFY WILL RECEIVE VARIOUS AMOUNTS OF MONEY DEPENDING UPON ANS WERS GIVEN TO QUESTIONS ON TH IS CLAIM FORM A ND INFORMATION IN SANT A CRUZ COUNTY’S COMPUTER DATABASE.
YOU MUST COMPLETE AND SUBMIT THIS CLAI M FORM NO LATER THAN MAY 16, 2009, to qualify for pay ment from settlement of this class action strip search case against Santa Cruz County. If you do not return a completed claim form by the due date you will receive no money from the settlement.

CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM

«BARCODE» SUON1--«CLAIM7»-«CKDIG» «FIRSTNAME» «LASTNAME» «ADDR1» «ADDR2» «CITY» «ST» «ZIP» «PHONE NUMBER» «CA. DRIVERS LICENSE NO.:» «DATE OF BIRTH» «NAME OF PARENT OR GUARDIAN»

Claim No.

Please enter your correct name, address and other information if it does not appear correctly above:

Last Name:

First Name:

Address:

Telephone Number (Day) City: Social Security Number: Date of Birth:

Telephone Number (Evening)
State: Zip Code: —
CA. Drivers License No.:
Name of Parent or Guardian:

ANSWER THIS QUESTION:
WERE YOU BOOKED AND STRIP SEARCHED AT A SANTA CRUZ COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY, PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT, AT ANY TIME FROM FEBRUARY 25, 2006, THROUGH AND INCLUDING AUGUST 26, 2008?

YES NO

If you answered “yes”, please continue to answer the questions on the back page:

Answer each of the following questions by placing a check in the “yes” or “no” box at the end of the question. If you check “yes” as the answer to any q uestion, if re quested, you MUST submit an explan ation, description of the circumstances, medical verification, witness statements, or s uch other documentation n ecessary to sup port your answer. If y ou do not provide the requested explanation, description or substantiation, your “yes” answer will be disregarded. CAUTION — THESE ANSWERS ARE GIVEN UNDER PENALTY OF P ERJURY. IF YOU GI VE A FALSE ANSWE R, YOU WILL LOSE YOUR RI GHT TO RECOVER MONEY, AND YOU MAY BE SUBJECT TO PROSECUTION.
*GARCIA1FIRST* 1

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 26 of 29

ALL PERSONS COMPLETING THIS CLAIM FORM, ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

1.

Did you have a physical disability or disfigurement (such as an embarrassing scar condition in a private area) or a

mental disability at the time of the strip search? If so, describe the physical or mental disability.

YES NO

2.

If you are female, were you pregnant at the time of the strip search? If so, give the full name and birth date of the

child born and the name of the hospital where it was born, or explain how the pregnancy ended.

YES NO

3.

Did you receive counseling or therapy for physical, emotional or psychological injury caused by the strip search

within ninety (90) days after the strip search? If so, give the name, address and telephone number(s) of the

therapist(s), the dates of the visits and provide copies of reports or records from your therapist to support your

claim:

YES NO

CRIMINAL FRAUD WILL RESULT IN DENIAL OF YOUR CLAIM.

I DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA THAT THE ABOVE IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

Dated:

Signature:

The information given here is private and will be held in strictest confidence. If you have any questions about this lawsuit, write to the Claims Administrator at Garcia v. Santa Cruz County Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, P.O. Box 8060, San Rafael, CA 94912-8060.

THIS CLAIM FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND RETURNED WITH A POSTMARK NO LATER THAN MAY 16, 2009.

Use the return envelope and mail the completed claim form and any supporting information to: Class Claim Administrator: Garcia Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, P.O. Box 8060, San Rafael, CA 94912-8060.
DO NOT RETURN THIS FORM TO THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ OR THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE.
If you need assistance in completing this form, please feel free to contact one of the class counsel, Mark E. Merin, at the Law Office of Ma rk E. Meri n, 2001 P Stre et, Suite 100, S acramento, CA 9581 1, Telephone (916) 443-6911; Facsimile (916) 4478336; E-Mail office@markmerin.com. DO NOT CONTACT THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ OR THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE FOR ASSISTANCE WITH THIS FORM.

If you would like your settlement check mailed to an addr ess other than that on the first pa ge of the Cla im Form, provide it here: (Address if different) to which settlement check should be mailed: Address:

City:

State: Zip Code: —

*GARCIA1SECOND* 2

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 27 of 29
EXHIBIT 3

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 28 of 29
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE
IF YOU WERE BOOKED INTO SANTA CRUZ COUNTY JAIL AND STRIP-SEARCHED, PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT, BETWEEN FEBRUARY 25, 2006 AND AUGUST 26, 2008, YOU MAY BE ENTITLED
TO MONETARY COMPENSATION UNDER A CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT.
A class action lawsuit is presently pending in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. If the proposed Settlement described below receives final approval, people who were subjec ted to a stri p search in a S anta Cruz Cou nty detention facility prior to arraignment on certain charges, will be eligible to receive money from the settlement fund.
If you believe you are a member of the class and you do not get a Claim Form mailed to you, you may obtain a claim form by writing to the Claims Administrator, Garcia v. County of Santa Cruz Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrators, P.O. Box 8060, San Rafael, CA 94912-8060, by calling the Claims Administrator at [Gilardi will provide] _________ , by visiting the website at
[Gilardi will provide]__________, or by contacting one of the class counsel at the Law Office of Mark E. Merin, 2001 P Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95811, (916) 443-6911, e-mail at office@markmerin.com.
DO NOT CONTACT EITHER THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ OR THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE CONCERNING THIS SETTLEMENT.
Your Claim Form must be completed and postmarked no later than May 16, 2009. For more information, please read this notice.
If You Wish to Claim Monetary Compensation, Obtain, Fill out and Mail the Claim Form as Soon as Possible but No Later than May 16, 2009.
PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE NOTICE CAREFULLY. YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE A PAYMENT.

There is now pending in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona a class action lawsuit involving the classes of persons defined below (Settlement Class Members — "SCMs"):
SETTLEMENT CLASS:
All arrestees booked into the Santa Cruz County Jail during the Class Period who were assigned to a housing unit and who underwent one or more strip searches prior to arraignment on the charges on which they were booked.
This Notice is to inform you that a settlement has been proposed in this action and that, as a potential class member, your rights may be affected by the settlem ent. This Notice also summarizes the terms and e ffect of the proposed settlement, what you can do to participate in it, and how you can obtain money under the settlement.
SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED TERMS
A Settlement Agreement ("Settlement") was entered into after negotiations between the parties, conducted with the assistance of a third party mediator. The Parties are requesting that the Court approve the Settlement.
A. Parties to the Settlement.
The parties to the Settlement are the Plaintiff named in Garcia v. County of Santa Cruz, et al., Case No. CV 08-00139-TUC-RCC on behalf of himself and the Settlement Class, and various defendants including the County of Santa Cruz. Counsel for the class are Mark E. Merin, Law Office of Mark E. Merin, 2001 P Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95811, Andrew C. Schwartz, Casper, Meadows, Schwartz & Cook, 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020, Walnut Creek, CA 94596, and Robert R. Rothstein, Rothstein, Donatelli, Hughes, Dahlstrom, Schoenburg & Bienvenu, LLP, 1215 Paseo de Peralta, P.O. Box 8180, Santa Fe, NM 87501.
B. Monetary Terms of Settlement
1. Class Fund and Related Expenses.

Defendants shall pay a maximum of $3,187,300 under the terms of the settlement that will hereafter be referred to as the Settlement Fund.
Class Counsel will seek an award of $725,000 of the Settlement Fund as attorney's fees and costs for recovering the Set tlement Fund for the Class Members. Up to $250,000 of the Settlement Fund may be used for costs of claims administration. Up to $2,162,300 may be used to pay valid claims. The representative plaintiff will receive a payment of $50,000, subject to Court approval.
2. Payments to Class Members Who File Claims.

Money for the class will be paid out based on a distribution formula, subject to payments being proportionately reduced if the total value of verified claims exceeds $2,162,300.

Pursuant to that distribution formula, members of the Settlement Class, upon return of a verified Claim Form, shall receive the following:

a.

All Settlement Class Members (“SCMs”) arrested on charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons (“non VDW

offenses”) excluding: 1) persons who, at the time of such Class Period booking were on parole, 2) persons who, at the

time of such booking, were required to submit to a search of their person as a condition of probation, and 3) persons

who, at the time of such booking, had been arrested on a VDW during the preceding seven (7) years who were strip-

searched, shall receive One Thousand, Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($1,750.00) for each booking, up to a maximum

of two (2).

b.

All SCMs arrested on non-VDW offenses who within seven (7) years of such arrest had a prior arrest for a VDW

offense shall be entitled to receive Thirty-Five Dollars ($35.00) per booking up to a maximum of two (2) bookings.

c.

All SCMs arrested on a VDW offense shall be entitled to receive Fifteen Dollars ($15.00).

In addition to the sums specified above, all SCMs will become eligible to receive additional sums, referred to as “Enhancements” of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00) for each applicable condition: (1) they were under 21 or over 60 at the time of the qualifying strip search; (2) had a physical or mental disability at the time of the strip search; and/or (3) were pregnant at the time of the strip search.

In addition to the payments described above, SCMs may become eligible to receive amounts, to be determined by negotiations between Class Counsel and County’s counsel, of not less than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) but no more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) if, at the time they submit a timely Claim Form to the Administrator, they also submit medical or psychological records or reports from licensed physicians or psychologists, marriage and family counselors, or clinical social workers establishing that, within 90 days after the strip search which is the subject of their claim, they received treatment for a physical, emotional or psychological injury caused by the strip search.

NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

PAGE 1 OF 2

Case 4:08-cv-00139-RCC Document 36-1 Filed 06/12/09 Page 29 of 29

C. Your Options as a Class Member.

1. Be Bound by, and Participate in the Settlement.

To qualify for a payment, you must send in a completed Claim Form to the Claims Administrator. A Claim Form is included in this

notice package. You can also get a Claim Form by: (1) calling this toll free number: [provided by Gilardi]

; (2) visiting the

website, [provided by Gilardi]

; 3) requesting a Claim Form from the offices of Class Counsel at: The Law Office of Mark

E. Merin, 2001 P Street #100, Sacramento, CA 95811, telephone (916) 443-6911; or (4) writing the Claims Administrator at:

Garcia v. County of Santa Cruz Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, P.O. Box 8060, San Rafael, CA 94912-8060.

You have until May 16, 2009, to submit a Claim Form.

Mail your completed Claim Form to: Garcia v. County of Santa Cruz Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, P.O. Box 8060, San Rafael, CA 94912-8060.
If you need assistance in completing the claim form, feel free to contact one of the class counsel, Mark E. Merin at the Law Office of Mark E. Merin, 2001 P Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95811, (916) 443-6911.
Remember, if you do not submit a Claim Form, you cannot get a payment. Also, please note that Class Members who have already settled their claims with the County of Santa Cruz or gone to trial with the County of Santa Cruz cannot receive a payment under this settlement. If you submit a Claim Form, you will be bound by the Settlement and receive money (if you are a class member). If you do not submit a Claim form but did not exclude yourself from the class, you will be bound by the terms of the Settlement and di smissal entered in this case, but you will not receive any money.
By participating in the S ettlement you will be waiving all your rights to all claims up to August 26, 2008, related to prearraignment strip searches that took place in any Santa Cruz County detention facility, even those of which you are not aware at present. By participating, you will be giving up unsuspected claims in the areas covered by the litigation.
2. Exclude Yourself From the Class.
You do not have to take part in the Settlement or be a member of the class. This is called “excluding” yourself. If you exclude yourself, you cannot get a payment and you cannot object to the Settlement. Any Court orders will not apply to you. To exclude yourself, you must file a Request for Exclusion (Opt-Out) with the Clerk of the Court at United States District Court for the District of Arizona, 405 West Congress Street, Suite 6170, Tucson, Arizona , on or before May 16, 2009, or as the Court may otherwise direct. You must also sign a request for exclusion letter that states that you want to be excluded from Garcia v. County of Santa Cruz, et al., Case No. CV 08-00139-TUC-RCC. Your exclusion letter must be mailed and postmarked before May 16, 2009, to: Garcia v. County of Santa Cruz Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claim Administrator, P.O. Box 8060, San Rafael, CA 94912-8060.
If you do not follow these instructions properly, you will lose your right to exclude yourself. If you exclude yourself, you cannot get any money from the Settlement and you cannot tell the Court you do not like the Settlement (which is called “objecting”). If you exclude yourself, you are no longer part of the class or the Settlement, but you can sue the County of Santa Cruz on your own if you choose to do so.
D. Fairness Hearing and Process for Objections.

A fairness hearing will be held on

[fai rness hearing date] , at the United States District Court for t he District of Arizona, 40 5

West Congress Street, Suite 6170, Tucson, Arizona. If you are a class member and do not exclude yourself, you can tell the Court you

do not like the Settlement or some part of it at this hearing. This is called objecting t o the Settlement. For example, you can say you do

not think the Settlement is fair or adequate. The Court will consider your views.

To object, you must send a letter to the Court that contains all of the following: (1) The name and title of the lawsuit, Garcia v. County of Santa C ruz, et al., Case No. CV 0 8-00139-TUC-RCC; (2) A statement of each objection y ou have and the facts that support the objections; (3) A description of any law or case su pporting the objections; (4) A statement on whether or not you or your lawyer will ask to appear at the Fairness Hearing to talk about your objections, and, if so, ho w long you will need to present your objections; and (5) Copies of any documents you or your lawyer will present at the Fairness Hearing.

Individually, or thro ugh counsel, any class mem ber has the right to object to the proposed Settlement as a whole, to t he amount of attorneys' fees and costs of Class Counsel, or to any portion of either. ANY SUCH OBJECTIONS MUST BE FI LED IN WRITING ON OR BEFORE MAY 16, 2009 , IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT O F ARIZONA, LOCATED AT 405 West Congress Street, Suite 6170, Tucson, Arizona, ATTN: CLERK, RE: GARCIA V. COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ SETTLEMENT, CASE NO. CV 08-00139-TUC-RCC. If you wish to appear and present your objections at the fairness hearing, you must also subm it a Notic e of Intent ion to Appear tha t identifies the case, contains your name and address, and explains the reason the app earance is desired. The Noti ce of Intention t o Appear and an y objections must be filed w ith the Court on or before May 16, 2009. You may be represented by your own attorney. If you are to be represented by an attorney at the hearing, his or her name, address and telephone number must be included in the Notice of Intention to Appear as well.
A copy of the Statement of Objection and/or Notice of Intention to Appear must also be mailed to: The Law Office of Mark E. Merin, 2001 P Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95811 ATTN: Mark E. Merin and to Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, P.L.C., 2901 North Central Ave, Ste 800, Phoenix, Arizona 85012, ATTN: Georgia A. Staton.

E. How to Obtain Further Information

For additional information regarding the Settlement and Claim Form, or a copy of the Settlement Agreement and Claim Form, you or

your counsel should contact: Garcia v County of Santa Cruz Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, P.O. Box

8060, San Rafael, CA 94912-8060. You may also check the Class Administrator's website at

[provided by Gilardi] or

call

[provided by Gilardi]

. You may also obtain detailed information about the case by examining the Court file located

in the office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, 405 West Congress Street, Suite 6170,

Tucson, Arizona.

DO NOT CONTACT THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ OR THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE FOR INFORMATION OR DOCUMENTS CONCERNING THIS SETTLEMENT.

F. Court Approval.

Although the Court has reviewed the proposed Settlement, no decision has been, or will be reached by the Court until the Fairness Hearing. This Notice does not indicate that the Court has yet approved the Settlement.

NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

PAGE 2 OF 2

 
 Case: 4:08-cv-00139-RCC As of: 06/13/2012 12:03 PM MST 1 of 6

U.S. District Court DISTRICT OF ARIZONA (Tucson Division) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:08−cv−00139−RCC

CLOSED,STD

Garcia v. Santa Cruz County, et. al Assigned to: Judge Raner C Collins Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff George Victor Garcia on behalf of himself and the class of similarly situated persons

Date Filed: 02/25/2008 Date Terminated: 07/17/2009 Jury Demand: Defendant Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question
represented by Andrew C Schwartz , Casper Meadows Schwartz &Cook 2121 N California Blvd Ste 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925−947−1147 Fax: 925−947−1131 Email: schwartz@cmslaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark E Merin Law Office of Mark E Merin 1010 F St., Ste. 300 Sacramento, CA 95814 916−443−6911 Fax: 916−447−8336 Email: mark@markmerin.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert Richard Rothstein Rothstein Donatelli Hughes Dahlstrom Schoenburg &Bienvenu LLP − Santa Fe, NM 500 4th St. NW, Ste. 400 Santa Fe, NM 87102 505−988−8004 Fax: 505−982−0307 Email: rrothstein@rothsteinlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Eric N Dahlstrom Rothstein Donatelli Hughes Dahlstrom Schoenburg &Frye 80 E Rio Salado Pkwy., Ste. 305 Tempe, AZ 85281 480−921−9296 Fax: 480−921−9249 Email: edahlstrom@rothsteinlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Santa Cruz, County of

represented by Georgia A Staton Jones Skelton &Hochuli PLC 2901 N Central Ave., Ste. 800 Phoenix, AZ 85012

Case: 4:08-cv-00139-RCC As of: 06/13/2012 12:03 PM MST 2 of 6

602−263−1700 Fax: 602−200−7854 Email: gstaton@jshfirm.com

Lisa S Wahlin Graif Barrett &Matura PC 1850 N Central Ave., Ste. 500 Phoenix, AZ 85004 602−792−5700 Fax: 602−792−5710 Email: lwahlin@gbmlawpc.com

Mark E Merin (See above for address)

Russell R Yurk Jones Skelton &Hochuli PLC 2901 N Central Ave., Ste. 800 Phoenix, AZ 85012 602−263−1709 Fax: 602−200−7834 Email: ryurk@jshfirm.com

Defendant
Sheriff Tony Estrada in his individual and official capacities

represented by Georgia A Staton (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Lisa S Wahlin (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Mark E Merin (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Russell R Yurk (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Unknown Parties Named as DOES 1−50 − Santa Cruz County Sheriff Deputies

represented by Georgia A Staton (See above for address)
Lisa S Wahlin (See above for address)

Mark E Merin (See above for address)

Russell R Yurk (See above for address)

Date Filed 02/25/2008
02/25/2008

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $ 350.00, receipt number 09700000000001751304, filed by George Victor Garcia, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons, # 3 Summons)(Dahlstrom, Eric) (Entered: 02/25/2008)
This case has been assigned to the Honorable Raner C. Collins. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV−08−139−TUC−RCC. (BJW, ) (Entered: 02/25/2008)

Case: 4:08-cv-00139-RCC As of: 06/13/2012 12:03 PM MST 3 of 6

02/25/2008 02/25/2008
02/28/2008 02/28/2008 02/28/2008
03/19/2008
03/20/2008 03/21/2008 03/21/2008 03/21/2008 03/21/2008 03/21/2008
04/08/2008 05/08/2008 05/08/2008 06/10/2008 06/17/2008 06/20/2008

2 Notice re Magistate Consent Form (BJW, ) (Entered: 02/25/2008)
3 Summons Issued as to Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada. (Attachments: # 1 Summons)(BJW, ). *** IMPORTANT: You must select "Document and stamps" or "Document and comments" on the print screen in order for the court seal to appear on the summons you print. (Entered: 02/25/2008)
4 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice as to attorney Robert R Rothstein on behalf of George Victor Garcia. (BAS, ) (Entered: 02/28/2008)
PRO HAC VICE FEE PAID. $ 100, receipt number PHX068443 as to Robert Richard Rothstein. (BAS, ) (Entered: 02/28/2008)
5 ORDER pursuant to General Order 05−25 granting 4 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice.Per the Court's Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, applicant has five (5) days in which to register as a user of the Electronic Filing System. Registration to be accomplished via the court's website at www.azd.uscourts.gov. (BAS, )(This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.) (Entered: 02/28/2008)
6 MOTION for Extension of Time to answer or respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint by DOES 1−50, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada. (Staton, Georgia) Modified EVENT on 4/8/2008 TO EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE ANSWER (KMF, ). (Entered: 03/19/2008)
7 RESPONSE to Motion re 6 MOTION for Extension of Time to answer or respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint filed by George Victor Garcia. (Rothstein, Robert) (Entered: 03/20/2008)
8 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice as to attorney Mark E Merin on behalf of George Victor Garcia. (BAS, ) (Entered: 03/21/2008)
9 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice as to attorney Andrew C Schwartz on behalf of George Victor Garcia. (BAS, ) (Entered: 03/21/2008)
PRO HAC VICE FEE PAID. $ 100, receipt number PHX069273 as to Mark E Merin. (BAS, ) (Entered: 03/21/2008)
PRO HAC VICE FEE PAID. $ 100, receipt number PHX069274 as to Andrew C Schwartz. (BAS, ) (Entered: 03/21/2008)
10 ORDER pursuant to General Order 05−25 granting 8 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice; granting 9 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice.Per the Court's Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, applicant has five (5) days in which to register as a user of the Electronic Filing System. Registration to be accomplished via the court's website at www.azd.uscourts.gov. (BAS, )(This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.) (Entered: 03/21/2008)
11 ORDER granting 6 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer, dfts' answer due 5/8/2008. Signed by Judge Raner C Collins on 4/8/08.(KMF, ) (Entered: 04/08/2008)
12 ANSWER to 1 Complaint by DOES 1−50, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada.(Staton, Georgia) (Entered: 05/08/2008)
13 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by DOES 1−50, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada. (Staton, Georgia) (Entered: 05/08/2008)
14 ORDER Telephonic Scheduling Conference set for 7/8/2008 11:00 AM before Judge Raner C Collins' law clerk. Joint rpt due 7/7/08. Signed by Judge Raner C Collins on 6/10/08. (KMF, ) (Entered: 06/10/2008)
15 NOTICE of Appearance by Russell R Yurk on behalf of all defendants (Yurk, Russell) (Entered: 06/17/2008)
16 NOTICE of Appearance by Lisa Carol Stelly−Wahlin on behalf of DOES 1−50, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada (Stelly−Wahlin, Lisa) (Entered: 06/20/2008)

Case: 4:08-cv-00139-RCC As of: 06/13/2012 12:03 PM MST 4 of 6

07/07/2008 07/09/2008
07/10/2008
07/31/2008 07/31/2008 08/06/2008 08/11/2008 08/26/2008 08/29/2008 09/12/2008 11/04/2008 12/19/2008
12/19/2008
01/15/2009
02/03/2009
02/04/2009

17 REPORT re: Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada. (Yurk, Russell) (Entered: 07/07/2008)
18 SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 12/15/2009. Dispositive motions due by 1/15/2009. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 2/26/2010. Joint Settlement Status Report due by 11/5/2008 &every 45 days thereafter. Signed by Judge Raner C Collins on 7/8/08. (KMF, ) (Entered: 07/09/2008)
19 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 12/15/2009. Dispositive motions due by 1/15/2010. Joint Proposed Pretrial Order due by 2/26/2010. Joint Settlement Status Report due by 11/5/2008 &every 45 days thereafter. Signed by Judge Raner C Collins on 7/9/08. (KMF, ) Modified TEXT on 7/10/2008 (KMF, ). (Entered: 07/10/2008)
20 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by George Victor Garcia for Plaintiffs' Initial Disclosures (Rothstein, Robert) (Entered: 07/31/2008)
21 Notice re Service of Defendants' Initial Disclosure Statement by DOES 1−50, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada (Staton, Georgia) (Entered: 07/31/2008)
22 Notice re Service of Defendants' Supplemental Disclosure Statement by Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada (Staton, Georgia) (Entered: 08/06/2008)
23 Notice re Service of Supplemental Disclosure Statement by DOES 1−50, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada (Staton, Georgia) (Entered: 08/11/2008)
24 Notice re Service of Defendants' Third Supplemental Disclosure Statement by DOES 1−50, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada (Staton, Georgia) (Entered: 08/26/2008)
25 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by George Victor Garcia (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 08/29/2008)
26 Notice re Service of Defendants' 4th Supplemental Disclosure Statement by Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada (Staton, Georgia) (Entered: 09/12/2008)
27 STATUS REPORT −Joint Settlement Status Report by George Victor Garcia. (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 11/04/2008)
28 MOTION for Stipulated Motion for Preliminary Approval of Provisional Settlement Class and Settlement of Class Action [Notice] by DOES 1−50, George Victor Garcia, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada. (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 12/19/2008)
29 MOTION for Stipulated Motion for Preliminary Approval of Provisional Settlement Class and Settlement of Class Action [Points and Authorities] by DOES 1−50, George Victor Garcia, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Text of Proposed Order, # 3 Text of Proposed Order Exhibits ABto Proposed Order)(Merin, Mark) (Entered: 12/19/2008)
30 ORDER granting 29 Stipulated Motion for Preliminary Approval of Provisional Settlement Class and Settlement of Class Action. Ordered that both parties are to appear in Court for Hearing on Proposed Preliminary Approval of Settlement of Class Action scheduled for 2/3/09 @ 1:30pm. ***See attached PDF for complete information***. Signed by Judge Raner C Collins on 1/14/09.(BAC, ) (Entered: 01/15/2009)
31 Minute Entry from hearing on Preliminary Approval of Settlement held before Judge Raner C Collins on 2/3/2009. Order signed. Fairness hearing set for 7/13/2009 at 01:30 PM before Judge Raner C Collins. See attached.pdf for details. (Court Reporter COURTSMART.)(MEG) (Entered: 02/03/2009)
32 ORDER FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION. The terms of the Stipulation of Settlement are hereby preliminarily approved, subject to further consideration thereof at the Fairness Hearing. The Court finds that the settlement is sufficiently within the range of reasonableness and that notice of the proposed settlement should be given as provided in this Order. Fairness Hearing set for 7/13/2009 01:30 PM before Judge Raner C Collins. Signed by Judge Raner C Collins on 2/3/09.**SEE ATTACHED PDF FOR

Case: 4:08-cv-00139-RCC As of: 06/13/2012 12:03 PM MST 5 of 6

03/03/2009 03/04/2009 05/22/2009 06/12/2009 06/12/2009 06/12/2009 06/12/2009 06/12/2009 06/12/2009
06/12/2009 06/12/2009 06/15/2009 06/15/2009 06/25/2009 07/13/2009

COMPLETE INFORMATION**(JEMB, ) (Entered: 02/04/2009)
33 STIPULATION to Correct Stipulated Settlement of Class Action by DOES 1−50, Santa Cruz County, Tony Estrada. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Staton, Georgia) (Entered: 03/03/2009)
34 ORDER granting 33 Stipulation : It is ordered approving the Provisional Settlement Class and Settlement of Class Action as modified in the stipulation to correct 33 . Signed by Judge Raner C Collins on 03/03/09. (LMF, ) (Entered: 03/04/2009)
35 OBJECTION to the allocation of the settlement funds by Plaintiff George Victor Garcia. (JEMB, ) (Entered: 05/27/2009)
36 NOTICE of Settlement The Parties' Joint Submission in Support of Final Approval of Stipulated Settlement by George Victor Garcia (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/12/2009)
37 DECLARATION of Declaration of Mark E. Merin in Support of the Parties' Joint Submission in Support of Final Approval of Stipulated Settlement re 36 Notice of Settlement by Plaintiff George Victor Garcia. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/12/2009)
38 DECLARATION of Ryanne Cozzi in Support of the Parties' Joint Submission in Support of Final Approval of Stipulated Settlement; Exhibit A re 36 Notice of Settlement by Plaintiff George Victor Garcia. (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/12/2009)
39 Additional Attachments to Main Document re 36 Notice of Settlement [Proposed] Order and Judgment of Dismissal by Plaintiff George Victor Garcia. (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/12/2009)
40 MOTION for Attorney Fees Class Counsel's Unopposed Application for Approval of Stipulated Attorney's Fees and Reimbursement of Costs by George Victor Garcia. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4)(Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/12/2009)
41 DECLARATION of Mark E. Merin in Support of Class Counsels' Unopposed Application for Approval of Stipulated Attorney's Fees and Reimbursement of Costs re 40 MOTION for Attorney Fees Class Counsel's Unopposed Application for Approval of Stipulated Attorney's Fees and Reimbursement of Costs by Plaintiff George Victor Garcia filed by George Victor Garcia. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit C)(Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/12/2009)
42 DECLARATION of Andrew C. Schwartz in Support of re 40 MOTION for Attorney Fees Class Counsel's Unopposed Application for Approval of Stipulated Attorney's Fees and Reimbursement of Costs by Plaintiff George Victor Garcia filed by George Victor Garcia. (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/12/2009)
43 DECLARATION of Robert R. Rothstein in Support of re 40 MOTION for Attorney Fees Class Counsel's Unopposed Application for Approval of Stipulated Attorney's Fees and Reimbursement of Costs by Plaintiff George Victor Garcia filed by George Victor Garcia. (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/12/2009)
44 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by George Victor Garcia re 43 Declaration, 40 MOTION for Attorney Fees Class Counsel's Unopposed Application for Approval of Stipulated Attorney's Fees and Reimbursement of Costs, 41 Declaration, 42 Declaration, (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/15/2009)
45 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by George Victor Garcia re 39 Additional Attachments to Main Document, 38 Declaration, 36 Notice of Settlement, 37 Declaration, (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/15/2009)
46 WITHDRAWAL OF DOCUMENT re 35 Objection : Notice of Withdrawal of Objection of George Victor Garcia by Plaintiff George Victor Garcia. (Merin, Mark) (Entered: 06/25/2009)
47 Minute Entry for Fairness Hearing before Judge Raner C Collins held on 7/13/2009. No individual party appearing from the settlement class and no one wishing to oppose the settlement as inquired in open court, Order and Judgment of

Case: 4:08-cv-00139-RCC As of: 06/13/2012 12:03 PM MST 6 of 6

07/13/2009 07/14/2009

Dismissal pursuant to stipulation of the parties is signed. PRESENT: Mark Merin and Andrew Schwartz for the Plaintiff; Georgia Staton for the defendants. (Court Reporter Erica Grund.) This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MEG) (Entered: 07/13/2009)
49 ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL pursuant to Stipulation of Settlement. It is Ordered that the complaint in this action be dismissed with prejudice and that judgment be and the same hereby is entered pursuant to the terms in this Order. ***See attached PDF for complete information***. Signed by Judge Raner C Collins on 7/13/09. (BAC, ) Modified on 7/24/2009 (DNO, INCORRECT FILE DATE; FILE DATE MODIFIED TO REFLECT FILE STAMP DATE; INCORRECT EVENT SELECTED). (Entered: 07/17/2009)
48 Letter from Claimant. (BAC, ) (Entered: 07/16/2009)