Curry v. Gonzales
| Decision Date | 24 June 2022 |
| Docket Number | Civ. 20-0116 RB/SCY |
| Parties | LISA CURRY AND RHIANNON MONTOYA, Plaintiffs, v. OFFICER MALCOLM J. GONZALES, OFFICER JOSEPH J. MARTINEZ, OFFICER J.P. VALDEZ, WARDEN MARIANNA VIGIL, AND CAPTAIN ROBERT GONZALES, IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico |
Plaintiff Lisa Curry alleges that Defendant Joseph J. Martinez formerly a correctional officer (CO) at the Springer Correctional Center (SCC), used his position of power to sexually abuse Curry while she was an inmate at SCC. Defendant Robert Gonzales was Chief of Security at SCC at the time of the abuse. Curry brings a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit and asserts a supervisory liability claim against Gonzales alleging that he violated her Eighth Amendment rights. Gonzales moves for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. Curry substantively responds and also moves for further discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). Gonzales seeks to strike a declaration Curry submitted with her response. For the reasons discussed in this Opinion the Court finds that Gonzales is not entitled to qualified immunity and will deny summary judgment deny the motion to strike, and deny the request for further discovery.
Curry was incarcerated at SCC in Springer, New Mexico from approximately August 2017 through March 2018.[1] (See Docs. 141-1 at 69:9-13; 141-5; 158-10 ¶ 3; see also Doc. 158-2 at 2.) Gonzales was SCC's Chief of Security and was responsible for “overseeing all the security operations of the institution” (i.e., safety, issues with the COs, breaches of security, and cameras) and for conducting investigations on complaints of inappropriate conduct between staff and inmates that came to his attention. (See Doc. 158-1 at 22:7-23:8, 26:4-15.) Shawn Rosenbarker served as SCC's Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) Compliance Manager. (Doc. 170-1 at 12:821.) Rosenbarker reported on PREA matters to Warden Marianna Vigil and to the state PREA Coordinator. (Id. at 18:5-20; Doc. 170-2 at 33:9-34:2.) Rosenbarker also worked as a shift commander and managed emergency preparedness, rosters, and “inputting of time” at SCC, and he reported to both Gonzales and Vigil for these duties. (See Doc. 170-1 at 17:8-18:20.)
While at SCC, Curry worked in the maintenance department. (See Doc. 141-1 at 68:19-21, 134:13-18.) Martinez, a maintenance department officer, began sexually assaulting Curry sometime in 2017. (See Docs. 158-3 at 202:14-20; 158-10 ¶ 4.) Curry asserts that Martinez raped her approximately twice per week over the course of several months. (See Doc. 158-3 at 202:1420.) The parties focus on one specific incident, in which Martinez assaulted Curry in the “mechanics shop” (the shop)[2] (See id. at 126:22-128:4.) Martinez took Curry to work on a heater in a small closet on the upper floor of the shop. (Id. at 128:5-20.) Curry concedes that the two were in this location legitimately as part of her job. (Id. at 134:9-18.) Martinez told Curry to undress and dance for him. (Id. at 128:22-129:1.) Curry initially testified that the two did not have sex on this occasion. (Id. at 129:2-4, 130:14-20.) During later questioning by her own attorney, Curry testified that she and Martinez did have sex during this incident.[3] (See id. at 228:8-229:9.)
Regardless, while they were in the room, Martinez heard a noise and told Curry to get dressed. (See id. at 129:1-6.) Gonzales and Rosenbarker were checking the motor pool area and noticed that the shop's door was unsecured. (See Doc. 158-1 at 247:2-6.) They walked into the shop and found Robin Wilson, another inmate employed by maintenance, on the lower level. (Id. at 247:6-8; see also Doc. 158-8.) They heard talking coming from the upper level of the shop, and Martinez and Curry “came down shortly after.” (See Doc. 158-1 at 247:9-248:3.) Curry was dressed but had only put on one of her boots. (See Doc. 158-3 at 129:4-6.) Gonzales asked why Curry's boot was off, and Martinez responded that he was using it to hit the heater vent. (Id. at 129:4-12.) Curry testified that there was a piece of equipment that, in the past, other employees had to kick with their shoe or hit with a hammer to make work. (See id. at 129:15-130:8.)
Gonzales found the incident “suspicious” and conducted an investigation. (See Docs. 1581 at 248:16-249:22; 158-8.) He reviewed video footage of the shop and saw Martinez and Curry go upstairs approximately five minutes before he and Rosenbarker entered.[4] (Docs. 158:1 at 248:20-249:2; 158-8.) He interviewed Wilson, “but she did not provide any specific information regarding inappropriate actions from” Martinez or Curry. (Doc. 158-8.) Wilson asked, however, to be reassigned to “a job away from maintenance, because of Lisa Curry and Joseph Martinez.” (Id.) Wilson “did not provide specific details” about her request. (Id.) There is no evidence that Gonzales further interviewed Curry or Martinez about the incident or reviewed any other camera footage of the two. (See Doc. 158-1 at 264:20-265:1.) The parties agree that Curry did not officially report any rape while she was at SCC.[5] (See Doc. 141-1 at 135:1-7.) Gonzales did not personally continue to do any surveillance of Martinez and Curry after this incident. (See Doc. 158-1 at 263:6-15.) Gonzales testified that Rosenbarker performed some further investigation, but he is not aware of those details. (Id. at 263:11-15; see also Doc. 158-8.)
On January 10, 2018, Gonzales gained information that an anonymous inmate told Sergeant Eva Ortiz that Martinez was “screwing some of his inmates.” (Docs. 158-6; 158-1 at 268:8-22.) The inmate reported that Curry was telling other inmates “that she smells just like [Martinez's] cologne” and bragging that Martinez was well-endowed. (Doc. 158-6.) Around the same time, SCC Nurse Christine Sisneros reported an incident she witnessed between Martinez and Curry. (See Doc. 158-7; see also Doc. 158-1 at 270:5-10.) Sisneros stated that Martinez asked for Band-Aids. (Doc. 158-7 at 1.) Sisneros gave him the Band-Aids and then heard Martinez and Curry talking and giggling in the hallway. (Id.) Sisneros went to the hallway and found Martinez “standing in very close proximity to [Curry] applying Band-Aids to her hands.” (Id.) When the pair realized Sisneros was there, they moved away from each other. (See id.)
Gonzales was aware that Rosenbarker began a PREA investigation in January 2018. (See Docs. 141-1 at 68:5-8, 136:2-19, 212:9-16; 158-1 at 268:8-22, 271:6-21.) As part of the PREA investigation, Curry was removed from her prison job and placed in segregation for two days. (See Docs. 141 at 6; 141-1 at 68:25-69:4, 136:2-19.) Curry testified that Gonzales and Rosenbarker approached her in segregation, and Gonzales directed Curry “to write a statement saying that . . . nothing happened.”[6] (See Doc. 141-1 at 136:2-16, 212:9-16; see also Doc. 141-6 ().) Curry also testified that she did not report the rapes because Martinez had threatened her-“he told [her] that he had the union on his side and that [she] wouldn't be believed.” (Doc. 158-3 at 229:18-230:9.) Curry was also worried that Martinez would hurt her family if she reported him. (See id. at 230:12231:2.) Curry later participated in an interview with a female investigator. (See Doc. 141-1 at 211:5-212:8.) She did not tell the investigator about the rapes. (Id. at 212:1-8.) Although Curry knew about the PREA program and how to use it, she never filed a PREA complaint. (See id. at 150:12-22; see also Doc. 141-7.)
Gonzales did not personally investigate Martinez after the January reports, but he did refer the matter to the Office of Professional Standards (OPS) for investigation on January 23, 2018. (See Docs. 158-1 at 268:8-22, 270:11-16; 170-4 at 3 ().) OPS returned its investigation report to Vigil on April 30, 2018. (Id. at 2.) Vigil does not recall discussing these sexual assault allegations with Gonzales. (See Doc. 158-11 at 135:22-136:4.) Curry asserts that Martinez sexually assaulted her one time after January 2018-in March 2018, while standing outside Unit 7.[7] (See Doc. 158-10 ¶ 7.)
On August 6, 2018, Agent Mark Jackson with the New Mexico State Police interviewed Curry. (See Doc. 158-4.) By this time, Martinez had already resigned from SCC. (See id. at 3 (); see also Doc. 170-2 at 173:12-24.) Curry told Jackson that Martinez had assaulted her on a daily basis for approximately three months.[8] (See id. at 2.) Martinez resigned after an investigation into allegations that he had been bringing drugs into SCC. (See id. at 173:5-24.) Gonzales testified that “Martinez'[s] name had come up regarding bringing narcotics into the facility numerous times, going back [several years].” (See Doc. 158-8.)
Curry filed suit in February 2020. (Compl.) She brings one federal claim against Gonzales under § 1983: cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.[9] (Id. ¶¶ 16166.) Gonzales moves for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. (Doc. 141.)
“Summary judgment is proper if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Halley v Huckaby, 902 F.3d 1136, 1143 (10th Cir. 2018), cert. denied, 139 S.Ct. 1347 (2019) (citing McCoy v. Meyers, 887 F.3d 1034,...
To continue reading
Request your trial