Martin v. City of Boise
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
902 F.3d 1031 (2018)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
The City of Boise (defendant) had two city ordinances related to homeless persons. The camping ordinance prohibited camping on public property. The disorderly conduct ordinance banned sleeping in any public or private place without permission. The state conducted a count of homeless individuals in the county in which Boise sits, Ada County. The results indicated that there were about 867 homeless persons in the county. At the time of the count, 125 individuals were unsheltered. Ada County had three homeless shelters, all located in Boise. The three shelters had 354 beds and 92 overflow mats combined. Two of the shelters had restrictions on who may stay. The City of Boise enforced the ordinances against six homeless or recently homeless persons (plaintiffs), including Robert Anderson and Robert Martin. These six individuals sought relief for citations under the ordinance, arguing it violated the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Martin and Anderson also sought declaratory and injunctive relief against future prosecution, alleging they expected to be cited under the ordinances in the future. The district court upheld the ordinances. The six individuals appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Berzon, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.