Joseph Richard Redner v. Charles S. Dean, Sheriff of Citrus County, Florida, Robert A. Butterworth

29 F.3d 1495, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 23252, 1994 WL 419484
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedAugust 26, 1994
Docket92-3033
StatusPublished
Cited by88 cases

This text of 29 F.3d 1495 (Joseph Richard Redner v. Charles S. Dean, Sheriff of Citrus County, Florida, Robert A. Butterworth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Joseph Richard Redner v. Charles S. Dean, Sheriff of Citrus County, Florida, Robert A. Butterworth, 29 F.3d 1495, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 23252, 1994 WL 419484 (11th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

*1497 BIRCH, Circuit Judge:

In this habeas corpus appeal, we must decide the constitutionality of a Citrus County, Florida licensing ordinance (the “Ordinance”) regulating adult entertainment establishments. The district court found the Ordinance facially unconstitutional because it lacked the procedural safeguards required for a system of prior restraint. The court therefore granted the writ of habeas corpus to the petitioner, who had been convicted of violating the Ordinance. The district court also granted the motion of the Florida Attorney General, releasing him from costs and from the responsibility for setting aside the petitioner’s conviction. We affirm both of the district court’s rulings.

I. BACKGROUND

In March 1988, the petitioner-appellee, Joseph Redner, began preparations to open an adult entertainment facility in Citrus County, Florida. Redner planned to open the facility on March 25, and by March 24, he had acquired all necessary permits and licenses. At the time, Citrus County had no ordinance specifically governing adult entertainment facilities. On March 25, however, the Citrus County Board of County Commissioners (the “Board”) held an emergency session and adopted temporary Citrus County Ordinance No. 88-05, entitled the “Citrus County Adult Entertainment Ordinance.” 1

The stated purpose of the Ordinance is “to establish reasonable and uniform regulations that will protect the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the people of Citrus County, Florida.” Citrus County Ordinance No. 88-05, § 1-5. The Ordinance attempts to regulate adult entertainment establishments 2 within Citrus County by requiring operators of such facilities to obtain a license from the County Administrator (the “Administrator”). 3 Id. § 2-2(a).

In order to obtain a license, an operator must submit to the Administrator an application containing, among other things, the applicant’s name, business designation, and criminal history; whether the applicant has had a previous license revoked or suspended; whether the applicant has any other licenses; and other information about the facility, including location, site plan, and a list of employees. Id. § 2-3(b). The Administrator must then send copies of the application to the Sheriff, the Department of Development Services, Fire Prevention, and the Health Department, whereupon each agency conducts an investigation. Id. § 2^4(a). If any of these investigations reveals that the proposed establishment will be in violation of any building, fire, health, or zoning statute, code, ordinance, or regulation, the agency must notify the Administrator. Id. § 2^1(b).

Section 2-5(c) provides the reasons for which the Administrator may deny a license. 4 The Administrator must make its decision to grant or deny a license within forty-five days *1498 of the filing of the application. 5 Id. § 2-5(a)(1). At the expiration of the forty-five-day time period, “the applicant may be permitted to begin operating the establishment for which a license is sought, unless and until the County Administrator notifies the applicant of a denial of the application and states the reason(s) for the denial.” Id.

An applicant who is denied a license has fifteen days to appeal to the Board. Id. § 6-1(1). Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the Clerk of the Board “shall schedule a hearing for as soon as the Board’s calendar will allow.” Id. § 6-1(2). “If, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Board finds that the license or permit should not have been denied ..., it shall so notify the County Administrator, who shall immediately grant ... the license....” M § 6-1(3). 6

In the present ease, Redner refused to comply with the Ordinance and opened his adult entertainment establishment without applying to the Administrator for a license. Within four days, Redner had been charged three times with violating the Ordinance by operating an adult entertainment establishment without a license. Seeking declaratory, injunctive, and compensatory remedies, Red-ner immediately brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida challenging the constitutionality of the Ordinance.

Before the federal case went to trial, however, Redner was tried in state court for Citrus County, where he defended on the grounds that the Ordinance was unconstitutional. The court upheld the Ordinance and Redner was convicted of three counts of operating an adult entertainment establishment without a license. Redner’s conviction was affirmed by the Florida Fifth Judicial Circuit Court, and the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal denied discretionary review.

In February 1989, Redner’s federal civil rights case went to trial in the Middle District of Florida. Refusing to interfere with the ongoing state criminal proceedings, the district court abstained from ruling on the constitutionality of the Ordinance. We affirmed the district court’s abstention, but remanded the case for further proceedings concerning Redner’s identical attacks on the constitutionality of the successor, permanent licensing ordinance, Redner v. Citrus County, 919 F.2d 646 (11th Cir.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 303, 116 L.Ed.2d 246, and cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 303, 116 L.Ed.2d 246 (1991). That case is being held in abeyance in the district court pending the outcome of this appeal.

In May 1991, Redner was to begin serving the sentences for his state criminal convictions. He filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The district court referred the petition to a magistrate judge, and on March 4, 1992, the magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation finding the Ordinance unconstitutional. The magistrate judge found that the Ordinance fails to provide the procedural safeguards necessary for a system of prior restraint because it does not place specific time limits on the decision-maker and does not provide for prompt judicial review. The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and granted Redner’s petition for habeas corpus relief: The court directed the two respondents, Florida Attorney General Robert Butterworth and Citrus County Sheriff Charles Dean, to set aside Redner’s convictions and discharge him from any restraint. The court also directed But-terworth and Dean to pay Redner’s costs.

On May 28, 1992, Butterworth made a motion under Federal Rule of Procedure 59(e) to amend the civil judgment to place the responsibility for costs and for setting aside the conviction on Dean alone. The district court granted this motion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Wacko's Too, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville
134 F.4th 1178 (Eleventh Circuit, 2025)
Hand v. Scott
285 F. Supp. 3d 1289 (N.D. Florida, 2018)
S.A. Restaurants, Inc. v. Deloney
909 F. Supp. 2d 881 (E.D. Michigan, 2012)
City of Seattle v. Davis
306 P.3d 961 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2012)
Augusta Video, Inc. v. Augusta-Richmond County
249 F. App'x 93 (Eleventh Circuit, 2007)
Abusaid v. Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners
637 F. Supp. 2d 1002 (M.D. Florida, 2007)
Rameses, Inc. v. County of Orange
481 F. Supp. 2d 1305 (M.D. Florida, 2007)
Curves, LLC v. Spalding County, Ga.
569 F. Supp. 2d 1305 (N.D. Georgia, 2007)
2025 Emery Highway, LLC v. Bibb County, Georgia
377 F. Supp. 2d 1310 (M.D. Georgia, 2005)
Solantic, LLC v. City of Neptune Beach
410 F.3d 1250 (Eleventh Circuit, 2005)
Public Citizen, Inc. v. Pinellas County
321 F. Supp. 2d 1275 (M.D. Florida, 2004)
City of Chattanooga v. Cinema 1, Inc.
150 S.W.3d 390 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2004)
Café Erotica of Florida, Inc. v. St. Johns County
360 F.3d 1274 (Eleventh Circuit, 2004)
Grech v. Clayton County, GA
335 F.3d 1326 (Eleventh Circuit, 2003)
Midvale City Corp. v. Haltom
2003 UT 26 (Utah Supreme Court, 2003)
Cam I, Inc. v. Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government
252 F. Supp. 2d 406 (W.D. Kentucky, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 F.3d 1495, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 23252, 1994 WL 419484, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-richard-redner-v-charles-s-dean-sheriff-of-citrus-county-ca11-1994.