Care, Custody, Control, & Restraint of Prisoners
A Duty to Protect
Deshaneyv. Winnebago County,489 U.S.189 (1989):“The Due Process Clause does not require the State to provide its citizens with particular protective services, it follows that the State cannot be held liable under the Clause for injuries that could have been averted had it chosen to provide them.”
Task: Duty to Enforce Domestic Protection Order
Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzalez, 2005 U.S. LEXIS 5214 (2005).Law Enforcement Officers have no duty under the procedural due process clause of the constitution to enforce protection orders in order to protect citizens from harm.Law Enforcement generally has no constitutional duty to protect citizens from third party harm.A duty may be found when law enforcement officers have in some way created or enhance the danger to an individual.A duty will be found in cases where the person to be protected is in the custody of government against their will and are powerless to protect themselves.
©Jack Ryan/LLRMI 2008
State Created Danger
Did law enforcement take an affirmative step which made the person more vulnerable?Did law enforcement place the person in the bad situation?
The one clear duty-Prisoners
4thAmendment- was response objectively reasonable14thAmendment- was officer deliberately indifferent to medical needs
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976).With medical needs:Plaintiff must establish that the police were deliberately indifferent to the serious medical needs of a person in custody.Note, this is one area where the duty to protect is an affirmative obligation of the police since the person in custody has no way to provide for themselves while deprived of liberty.
Petrovv. West Warwick
As an initial point, while several courts havecited Cityof Revere v. Massachusetts General Hospital, 463 U.S.239,for the proposition that law enforcement satisfies any duty to provide medical care by bringing a detainee to medical or rescue personnel fortheCourt takes issue with these courts' relianceonCityof Revere; that case does not hold that, as a matter of law, law enforcement officers satisfy their dutyof careso easily.
TheCourt concludes that the officers had a common-law duty to render emergencyassistance.THUS-If trained in CPR-do CPR
McRavenv. Sanders, 577 F.3d 974, 983 (8th Cir. 2009)("An officer trained in CPR, who fails to perform it on a prisoner manifestly in need of such assistance, is liable under§ 1983for deliberate indifference."(Jonesv. City of Cincinnati, 521 F.3d 555, 560 (6th Cir. 2008)(holding that officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on deliberate indifference claim rooted in their failure to provide CPR where they knew the arrestee was handcuffed and not breathing)(citingEstateofOwensbyv. City of Cincinnati, 414 F.3d 596, 602 (6th Cir.2005));Tlamka, 244 F.3d at 633(holding that corrections officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on deliberate indifference claim where they failed to provide CPR or to approach prisoner for ten minutes, even though the officers were trained in CPR and the prisoner's condition was obviously life threatening);Sparks v. SusquehannaCnty., No. 3:05cv2274, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29320, 2009 WL 922489, at *10 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 3, 2009)(concludingthat a jury could find that correctional officer was deliberately indifferent when she was delayed in calling for assistance and was unwilling to perform CPR despite having been trained);Ashworth v. Round Lake Beach Police Dep't., No. 03 C 7011, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14844, 2005 WL 1785314, at *7 (N.D. Ill. July 21, 2005)(holding that the failure of officers to perform CPR after calling an ambulance raises jury question of deliberate indifference).
Jones v. City of Cincinnati, 2012 FED App. 1240N (6th Cir.2012)
To prevail on a claim against police officers for failure to provide medical care to an arrestee, a plaintiff must show that the officers were "deliberately indifferent" to the arrestee's "sufficiently serious" medical need. Deliberate indifference requires that an officer (1) be aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists, (2) draw the inference, and (3) act or fail to act in a manner demonstrating reckless or callous indifference toward the individual's rights.
Assuming these facts, we determine that the officers did not disregard Jones's substantial risk of positional asphyxia. By 6:03:34 (about one minute after Slade's question), the officers realized that Jones should be rolled and started rolling him. Six seconds later, the officers had Jones on his back. They also realized that the firefighters left and immediately called for a rescue unit. [MVR at 6:03:47-6:04:00.] During the two-minute [*14] wait for the firefighters, the officers checked Jones's breathing, monitored his pulse, rubbed his sternum area, turned him on his side, and retrieved a first-aid box. [MVR at 6:04:02-6:05:50.] The officers also shouted for the firefighters to hurry to Jones's side. [MVR at 6:05:38-6:05:41.] The officers' attempts to aid Jones undermine the claim that they deliberately disregarded Jones's substantial medical risk. Their actions distinctively differ from the officers' inaction inEstate ofOwensbyv. City of Cincinnati.414 F.3d 596, 603 (6th Cir. 2005) (denying qualified immunity where the evidence demonstrated that officers, after beating a suspect, locked him in the back of a police cruiser, and observed him in significant physical distress, "yet made no attempt to summon or provide any medical care" until six minutes later, after greeting each other, preparing for their superiors' arrival, and adjusting their uniforms). Our conclusion on deliberate indifference obviates any need to determine the clearly established law at the time of the incident.
After the force is used…
Render Aid to the extent you are trained…Call EMSLA Bank of America Robbery ExampleRange trainingIf you think they’re playing possum-call EMS
Pass on the information
Beyond the requirement of rendering aid…When you pass him off to jail…let them know.Jails-it’s a great practice to have officers fill out sheet which asks questions related to injury and mental health related statements of arrestee
Jackson v. Wilkins, 2013 FED App. 0237N (6th Cir. 2013)
The decedent sped away from officers, crashed, and ran away. When an officertasedthe decedent, the decedent slammed into the metal arm of a nearby dumpster. The decedent struggled with the officers and was punched, kicked, andtasedrepeatedly. The decedent could not stand up, pleaded for help, and was placed in an officer's car. At the jail, the decedent defecated on himself and vomited. The decedent died at the hospital shortly thereafter. The appellate court determined that the estate's excessive force claims failed because, inter alia, the officers' decision to use force was reasonable, the officers had to use a significant amount of force to subdue the decedent, and they stopped applying force the moment he stopped resisting them. The estate's deliberate indifference claim against one officer survived because, inter alia, a reasonable jury could infer that the officer saw the collision with the dumpster arm, the officer heard the decedent say repeatedly that he could not stand up, he heard the decedent's moans for help, he saw the decedent's rapid physical deterioration, and he failed to pass on important information about the injury.
After the fight…
Rescue Position-Facilitate Breathing
Q.··How long were you there before they got his hands cuffed behind his back, or were they already cuffed?A.··They were already cuffed when I got there.Q.··So what are all these people doing there if he'srestrained with his arms behind his back?A.··Everybody is just like freaked out, I guess, atwhat happened.·Q.··Are they tending to him?··Are they trying to givehim medical assistance?A.··No.Q.··What were they doing there?A.··Trying to catch their breath.
Multiple Deployments-Beyond 15 secondsLong Duration DeploymentsChest Shot
Q.So were you trained in March, or warned inMarch of2008 that prolonged, repeated, or multipletasingscouldhave any adverse health effects on human beings, otherthan the breathing issue that we've already covered?Atthis point I don'trecall.Q. Do you recall receiving any training on the riskofsomething called metabolic acidosis?A. I don't recall.
QNow, what have you been trained– andI understand this would be after yourinitial training-- regarding what are the healthrisks of, let's say, multiple or extendedduration exposuresto X26 electrical current?AI know that during our trainingwe've beentold not to Taser pregnant females andnot toTaser on stairs or next to a ledge or bridge. AndI know that -- I'm trying to remember. You'reasking about.
QSure. I willbe happyto. Were you given any specifictraining atany time by your department that thereare certainhealth risks specifically associatedwith repeatedor long duration exposures?ASpecific to Taser, I -- I don't know. Iknow that we use a minimum amount offorcethat's necessary to affect any arrest, though.
Handcuffing-the most common form of restraint…
Too tight-leads to injuryGenerally requires complaintGenerally requires injuryCheck for fit and double-lockPre-existing injury-stated or observedVulnerable Classes
Sit them up…Buckle them up…Keep an eye on them…Use your camera…Watch for physical distress…If distress-get EMS or go to hospital…
QAnd just very generally, what'syour understandingof the concept of excited delirium?AIt's, basically, a sensory overload.QHave you -- do you havean understandingwhether somebody who is in astate ofexcited delirium can die or pass away as aresult?AI believe I've heard it used asa causeof death.QHave you ever been trained as apolice officerthat there are tactics that can beused thatwould minimize that risk?AI can't say that, no.