Doe v. Shelby Cnty. Gov't

• Decision Date: 09 October 2020
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 2:18-cv-02637-JPM/tmp
• Parties: JOHN DOE, Plaintiff, v. SHELBY COUNTY GOVERNMENT; CHIEF KIRK FIELDS, Interim Director Shelby County Jail; UNKNOWN JAILER 1; and FLOYD BONNER, current Sheriff of Shelby County, as Successor to BILL OLDHAM, individually and in their official capacities, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Tennessee

JOHN DOE, Plaintiff, v. SHELBY COUNTY GOVERNMENT; CHIEF KIRK FIELDS, Interim Director Shelby County Jail;UNKNOWN JAILER 1; and FLOYD BONNER, current Sheriff of Shelby County,as Successor to BILL OLDHAM, individually and in their official capacities, Defendants.

Civil Action No. 2:18-cv-02637-JPM/tmp

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION

October 9, 2020

Jury Demanded

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Before the Court is Defendant Shelby County's Amended Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on January 15, 2020. (ECF No. 60.) Plaintiff John Doe filed a Response on February 17, 2020. (ECF No. 68.) Defendants filed their Reply on March 2, 2020. (ECF No. 69.) For the following reasons, Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.

I. BACKGROUND

This action arises out of John Doe's report of sexual assault by his cell mate during a term of confinement at the Shelby County Criminal Justice Center at 201 Poplar Avenue, Memphis, Tennessee (hereinafter "Shelby County Jail"). Plaintiff asserts that the sexual assault during his confinement constitutes a violation of his constitutional rights and that he is entitled to recover from Shelby County. (ECF No. 1-1.)

A. Undisputed Facts

The following facts are undisputed based on Plaintiff's Response to Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts (ECF No. 67-1) and in accordance with Local Rule 56.1(b). Local Rule 56.1(b) sets out the response options for the non-moving party:

Any party opposing the motion for summary judgment must respond to each fact set forth by the movant by either:

1) Agreeing that the fact is undisputed;

2) Agreeing that the fact is undisputed for the purpose of ruling on the motion for summary judgment only; or

3) Demonstrating that the fact is disputed.

When the non-moving party disputes essential material facts, "[e]ach such disputed fact shall be set forth in a separate, numbered paragraph with specific citations to the record supporting the contention that such fact is in dispute." L.R. 56.1(b)(3). Compliance or non-compliance with the local rule can be determined by comparing the moving party's statement of undisputed facts (see in the instant case, ECF No. 60-2) with the respondent's statement of undisputed facts (see ECF No. 67-1.) If the non-moving party fails to respond to a moving party's statement of material facts within the time periods provided by the rules, the Court assumes that the "asserted facts are not disputed for purposes of summary judgment." L.R. 56.1 (d); see, e.g., Provost v. Crockett County, 2018 WL 4224907 at *3 (W.D. Tenn. Sep. 5, 2018) ("If Plaintiffs fail to demonstrate that a fact is disputed or fail to address Defendants' statement of facts properly, the Court will 'consider the fact undisputed for purposes' of ruling on the motion[.]").

Plaintiff John Doe was first arrested in 2017 for allegedly stealing a car. (ECF Nos. 60-2 ¶ 34; 67-1 ¶ 34.) In May 2018, Plaintiff was arrested again, leading to his placement at Shelby County Jail. (Id. ¶ 35.) In response to questions about the underlying conduct resulting in his May 2018 arrest, Plaintiff invoked his Fifth Amendment rights and declined to answer. (Id. ¶ 37.)Plaintiff was interviewed once for screening purposes on May 15, 2018, and again for classification purposes on May 22, 2018. (Id. ¶ 40.)

At the time of Plaintiff's initial screening on May 15, 2018, Plaintiff was 22 years old, stood in the range of 5 feet 6 inches and 5 feet 8 inches, and weighed between 120 and 142 pounds. (ECF Nos. 60-2 ¶ 44; 67-1 ¶ 44.) At Plaintiff's initial screening on May 15, 2018, he indicated that his criminal history was not exclusively non-violent and that he had previously received mental treatment at Lakeside (a mental health facility). (Id. ¶¶ 41, 44.) Plaintiff further indicated that he identifies as straight, which is confirmed by both of his intake screening forms. (Id. ¶ 42.). On Plaintiff's intake forms, he indicated that he does not identify as gay, bisexual, transgender, intersexual, or gender nonconforming. (Id. ¶ 42.) Both of Plaintiff's intake screening forms also note that this instance was not his first major incarceration, that he had no reason to fear placement in general population, that he had not been sexually assaulted or abused as a child, that he had not been approached for sex or threatened with sexual assault while incarcerated, and that he had not been previously assaulted while incarcerated. (Id. ¶ 43.). Plaintiff alleges that he was sexually assaulted and/or raped by inmate and cellmate Rashawn Jones while housed in a cell with him at Shelby County Jail. (ECF No. 1-1.)

Rashawn Jones was screened, and according to the intake forms, he was 18 years old, stood between 5 feet 5 inches and 5 feet 6 inches, and weighed 135 pounds.¹ (ECF Nos. 60-2 ¶ 46; 67-1 ¶ 46.) Furthermore, Inmate Jones had previously received mental health treatment at Lakeside, and had been transferred from Shelby County Juvenile Court to Shelby County Jail with multiplecounts of robbery, aggravated robbery, and carjacking.² (Id. ¶ 46.)

During the screening process, Jones denied any criminal history of sex offenses or histories of sexual victimization. (ECF Nos. 60-2 ¶ 47; 67-1 ¶ 47.) Per Jail policy, inmates may not be housed in cells with other inmates until they have been screened and classified by the Classification Office. (Id. ¶ 14.) "The Classification Office is staffed with Jail Processing Specialists who are trained in inmate intake, screening, and classification." (Id. ¶¶ 1, 15.)³ "The Jail Processing Specialists receive specialized classification training in conformance with the professional standards established by the American Correctional Association ("ACA") and the National PREA Policy Center." (Id. ¶¶ 1, 16.)⁴ "The Jail Processing Specialists/the Classification Office have standard operating procedures ("SOP") which govern inmate classification and these operating procedures require, at a minimum, an inmate's mental and emotional stability, history of assaultive behavior, medical status, and age; and youthful offenders receive consideration regarding their physical, mental, social, and educational maturity." (Id. ¶¶ 1, 17.)⁵ Jail Processing Specialists rely on the inmates' intake information to make a determination as to the best housing location. (Id. ¶ 20.)

Under SOP 347, inmates can be housed in single cells if they have severe medicaldisabilities, suffer from serious mental illness, are themselves sexual predators, or are likely to be exploited or victimized by others. (ECF Nos. 60-2 ¶ 18; 67-1 ¶ 18.) The "Jail Processing Specialists rely on the inmates' intake information to make a determination as to housing location. (Id. ¶ 20.)

Inmates are housed in sections called Pods. (ECF Nos. 60-2 ¶ 6; 67-1 ¶ 6.) F-Pod is "primarily reserved for inmates 18-25 years old who have displayed good behavior in the jail and wish to participate in the Jail's inmate programs."⁶ (Id. ¶ 9.) Inmates are screened before they are assigned to pods or otherwise housed with cellmates. (Id. ¶ 14.) Prior to being housed together, both inmates had been screened and classified by the Classification Office. (Id. ¶ 39.) Plaintiff and Jones were cellmates both housed in F-Pod in June 2018. (Id. ¶ 38.) While Plaintiff was housed with Jones, Jones was being prescribed and was taking medication. (Id. ¶ 50.)

The Shelby County Sheriff's Office maintains polices on the prevention of prison rape and sexual assault in the Shelby County Jail. (ECF Nos. 60-2 ¶ 1; 67-1 ¶ 1.) These policies include a "zero-tolerance policy for inmate-on-inmate sexual contact." (Id. ¶ 3.) The Shelby County Jail also employs a PREA Coordinator, Patricia Dixon, who is responsible for ensuring compliance with PREA, including ensuring that PREA claims are investigated properly and promptly, and that all inmates are aware of their rights and protections under PREA while housed at the Shelby County Jail.⁷ (Id. ¶ 5.)

The Shelby County Jail is accredited by ACA and the Tennessee Correctional Institute. (ECF Nos. 60-2 ¶ 19; 67-1 ¶ 19.) Shelby County Jail's medical provider is accredited by theNational Commission on Correctional Health and PREA compliance is part of their accreditation process. (Id.) Shelby County Jail also provides some PREA training to Corrections Deputies, which lasts roughly ten weeks, along with in-service training after the completion of basic training.⁸ (Id. ¶¶ 22-23, 25.) The Deputies are trained on, and required to follow, the Sheriff's Office rules and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). (Id. ¶ 26.) Deputies can be disciplined for violating SOPs, and all updates to the SOPs are distributed to the Deputies. (Id. ¶ 27.) Corrections Deputies are assigned to monitor all pods twenty-four hours a day. (Id. ¶ 28.) In all general population pods, including F-Pod, the Corrections Deputy assigned to the Pod is required to make rounds throughout the Pod, observing into the inside of cells, roughly every thirty (30) minutes. (Id. ¶ 29.) The timing of rounds sometimes varies slightly to keep rounds from being predictable to the inmates. (Id. ¶ 30.) Inmates are not permitted to put any sort of visual barrier in their cell that would prevent a Corrections Deputy from being able to view into the cell while making rounds and/or wellness checks. (Id. ¶ 31.) The most important things that the Corrections Deputies are required to ensure in making rounds are that the inmates are alive and well, not being assaulted, and are not engaging in any conduct prohibited by PREA. (Id. ¶ 32.) Corrections Deputies also conduct random cell searches. (Id. ¶ 33.)

Each of the rapes or sexual assaults against Plaintiff by Inmate Jones lasted about ten minutes. (ECF Nos. 60-2 ¶ 51; 67-1 ¶ 51.) Plaintiff eventually notified Shelby County Jail personnel after the assaults by Inmate Jones. (Id. ¶ 52.) Plaintiff and Jones were then immediately separated. (Id. ¶ 53.) Plaintiff was not made to continue housing in the...