Civil Practice: Right to Counsel-Indigent Defendants-Sovereign Immunity

Where plaintiffs brought a class action against the state and governor of Missouri and officials of the state’s public-defender system arguing that the state was failing to meet its obligations to provide indigent criminal defendants with meaningful representation, the state did not waive sovereign immunity by removing the action from state to federal court, and the judgment is reversed and remanded because sovereign immunity precluded an action against the state for cases involving equitable relief, and exceptions to the doctrine for consent and proprietary function did not apply, and the district court also erred in denying the governor’s motion for sovereign immunity.

Judgment is reversed and remanded.

Church v. State (MLW No. 72577/Case No. 17-2857 – 25 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Benton, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, Laughrey, J. (D. John Sauer, Jefferson City, argued for appellant; Michael Martinich Sauter and Joshua M. Divine appeared on the brief) (Matthew R. Shahabian, Washington, D.C., argued for appellee; Anthony E. Rothert, Jessie M. Steffan, Jason D. Williamson, Gillian R. Wilcox, Amy E. Breihan, Aaron Scherzer, Robert L. Sills, Camille J. Rosca, Easha Anand, Evan Rose, Will Melehani, James Maune, Marnee R. Rand , Anthony Tartaglio and Annie Prasad appeared on the brief).