A federal judge in Albany said the constitutional rights of teen defendants in Onondaga County were violated when members of law enforcement did not allow them to consult privately with their attorneys before appearing in court.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Kahn in the Northern District of New York sharply criticized county officials, who created a policy last year instructing law enforcement to attend those meetings.

“Given how clearly the Sheriff’s policy violates the Constitution, it is unfortunate that this case had to proceed while young people faced arraignments, bail arguments, and motion hearings without the full assistance of counsel to which they are entitled,” Kahn wrote.

He ordered the county, while granting a motion for a preliminary injunction, to make a room available at the Syracuse Criminal Courthouse for those teens to confer privately with their attorneys before and after court appearances and barred members of law enforcement from sitting in on those meetings.

The lawsuit was brought against Onondaga County and the Onondaga County Sheriff’s Office earlier this year by Legal Services of Central New York. Josh Cotter, an attorney with Legal Services, said he expects the county to settle the case after Kahn’s decision.

“I think it’s unfortunate that we even had to bring this lawsuit but we’re very happy with the judge’s decision and hope the county acts quickly to make sure the constitutional rights of young people in Onondaga County are not violated anymore,” Cotter said.

They were challenging a recently enacted policy by officials in Onondaga County that ordered members of law enforcement to be posted in rooms where teenage defendants met with their attorneys before or after an appearance in court.

The policy was created alongside the first phase of Raise the Age, a law in New York that allows 16- and 17-year-olds to be treated differently than adults in the state court system when fully implemented. Those children were previously able to be tried as adults

The first phase began last October and allowed 16-year-old defendants to no longer be tried as adults. Those defendants, instead, are now brought to a special Youth Part of criminal court and are usually then transferred to family court for further proceedings. A small share of those children remain in criminal court based on the nature of the charges against them.

Janelle Eckel, an attorney on the Onondaga County Bar Association Assigned Counsel panel, said she’s had five clients with cases in the Youth Part, where she was denied a private space to meet with them, according to the decision. Law enforcement told her, the decision said, that it was to ensure her safety.

County officials have defended the policy in previous filings, saying it was implemented to comply with regulations from the state Commission on Correction regarding Raise the Age.

State law, the county argued, requires members of law enforcement to maintain “constant supervision” of a defendant while they’re being transported. But a provision of Raise the Age bars teenagers from using the adult interview rooms to meet with their attorney, where they could presumably be supervised without their conversation being overhead.

Because of that part of the law, members of law enforcement have teenagers use the mediation room in the courthouse to meet with their attorneys. Those rooms aren’t designed in a way for law enforcement to maintain constant supervision over the defendants, the county argued.

Kahn wrote that the county’s interpretation of what was required of them was incorrect. After a defendant has arrived at court, they’re no longer being transported, he wrote, so members of law enforcement are not required to sit in on meetings with the individual’s attorney.

“Sitting in a courthouse to consult her attorney before court, a detainee is not being ‘transported’ anywhere; she has arrived at her destination,” Kahn said.

As for the design of the room, Kahn had a suggestion. If the county is concerned about the potential security risk of a teenage defendant, he wrote, they’re free to build a window to allow law enforcement to maintain the appropriate amount of supervision over them without infringing on their Sixth Amendment rights.

“Defendants have not submitted any evidence that leaving shackled teenagers alone with their attorneys would pose any increased security risk,” Kahn wrote. “And even if security does require constant observation, the cost of installing a window in the Courthouse is a small price to pay for protecting the right to counsel.”

That’s not required, Kahn mentioned in a footnote. The county can continue to use the same room, unchanged, for teenage defendants to meet with their attorneys. But members of law enforcement will have to stay outside.

While Cotter expects the county to settle the case, it remains open for now. Kahn, in his decision, also granted a motion to certify a class in the lawsuit.

Representatives for Onondaga County did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the decision. A spokesman for the Sheriff’s Office declined to comment since the lawsuit is pending.

READ MORE: