Montgomery v. Barr
| Citation | 507 F.Supp.3d 711 |
| Decision Date | 15 December 2020 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action No. 4:20-cv-01281-P |
| Parties | Lisa MONTGOMERY, Plaintiff, v. William P. BARR et al., Defendants. |
| Court | United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Northern District of Texas |
Arthur Spitzer, Foundation of the National Capital Area, David E. Marvin, Robin Linnett Nunn, Pro Hac Vice, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Washington, DC, Anjana Samant, Pro Hac Vice, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York, NY, Brian Stull, Cassandra Stubbs, American Civil Liberties Union, Durham, NC, David I. Monteiro, Justin Roel Chapa, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Dallas, TX, Michael C. D'Agostino, Pro Hac Vice, Morgan Lewis & Bockius, Hartford, CT, for Plaintiff.
Alan T. Simpson, US Attorney's Office, Kansas City, MO, Brian Walters Stoltz, U.S. Attorney's Office, Dallas, TX, Edward L. Marshall, Office of the Texas Attorney General, Austin, TX, Johnny Hillary Walker, III, U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, Washington, DC, for Defendants.
Before the Court is Plaintiff Lisa Montgomery's Amended Motion for Preliminary Injunction ("Amended Motion"), in which she asks the Court to bar her transfer to the Bureau of Prison's ("BOP") facility in Terre Haute, Indiana where she will be executed on January 12, 2021. See ECF No. 53. Defendants William P. Barr, Attorney General of the United States in his official capacity; the Federal Bureau of Prisons ("BOP"); Michael Carvajal, Director of the BOP in his official capacity; Michael Carr, Warden of Federal Medical Center Carswell ("FMC Carswell" or "Carswell"); T.J. Watson, Warden of Federal Correctional Complex Terre Haute ("FCC Terre Haute" or "Terre Haute") in his official capacity; Rick Winter, BOP Regional Counsel for the North Central Region in his official capacity; and Alix M. McLearen, BOP National Administrator of Women and Special Populations in her official capacity, respond that they plan to transport Montgomery to a separate execution building at BOP's FCC Terre Haute facility one to two days before her scheduled execution where she will be the sole inmate in the execution facility until her execution is carried out. See generally Original Response ( ), ECF No. 23.
Despite the parties’ lengthy briefing, the issue that Montgomery presents is straightforward. Based on past sexual abuse by males and her associated mental health conditions as a result of such abuse, Montgomery claims it would be discriminatory to be transferred from FMC Carswell to FCC Terre Haute—an all-male prison facility with some male BOP staff supervising her—for forty-eight hours prior to her execution. Thus, Montgomery asks the Court to enjoin the BOP from transferring her to FCC Terre Haute and require that Montgomery's execution take place at FMC Carswell. While the Court is not unsympathetic to Montgomery's concerns, as explained more fully below, the Court finds them unsupported by law and fact as Montgomery will be the only prisoner in the FCC Terre Haute execution facility for a duration of forty-eight hours prior to execution, she will be observed by male and female BOP staff members, and she will have access to an on-call BOP doctor and psychologist. Therefore, because Montgomery has not alleged sufficient facts to establish an arguable violation of her federal constitutional rights and because the applicable law forecloses her federal statutory claims, the Court holds that Montgomery's Amended Motion for Preliminary Injunction should be and hereby is DENIED and her amended complaint DISMISSED without prejudice.
At the onset, Montgomery objects to Defendants’ recitation of the facts relevant to her underlying criminal conviction and capital sentence, but as shown below these facts form the background necessary to understand the case and claims considered within this Order. Indeed, given the nature of Montgomery's claims, the Court cannot consider certain facts in a vacuum. Montgomery's objection is OVERRULED.
Lisa Montgomery experienced severe, continuous sexual and physical abuse at her stepfather's hands beginning in her early childhood. United States v. Montgomery , 635 F.3d 1074, 1081 (8th Cir. 2011) ; Amended Complaint ("Am. Comp.") at 2–3, ECF No. 43. When she turned eighteen, Montgomery married Carl Boman, her stepbrother, who she alleges subjected her to further sexual abuse. Montgomery , 635 F.3d at 1081 ; Am. Comp. at 3. Together they had four children, after which she underwent tubal fulguration
, a sterilization procedure that involved occluding her fallopian tubes by cauterization, rendering her incapable of having children as confirmed by a pretrial hysterosalpingogram. Montgomery , 635 F.3d at 1079, 1081.
In the years following her procedure, Montgomery claimed that she had four more pregnancies. Id. at 1081. During a period of separation from Boman in 1994, Montgomery had an affair and claimed that she was pregnant, but she ceased making that claim once they reconciled. Id. The two later divorced. Id.
Montgomery later met her second husband, Kevin Montgomery ("Kevin"), who she did not tell about the sterilization procedure. Id. at 1079. In 2000, while the two were still dating, she claimed that she was pregnant and planned to get an abortion. Id. at 1081. Kevin gave her forty dollars for the abortion, after which the "pregnancy" was not mentioned again. Id. Two years later, Montgomery informed her friends and family that she was pregnant again, claiming that she received prenatal care from her physician but forbidding Kevin from attending the appointments. Id. The physician testified that he treated Montgomery for ankle pain and a cold but that he provided no prenatal care whatsoever. Id. When the alleged due date passed, Montgomery claimed that the baby died and that she donated the body to science. Id.
Montgomery met her victim, Bobbie Jo Stinnett, at a dog show in April 2004. Id. at 1079. The two bred rat terrier dogs and met through online message boards dedicated to as much. Id. Stinnett maintained a website to promote her dog breeding business located in her home in Skidmore, Missouri. Id. The website included pictures of Stinnett and her dogs. Id . In spring 2004, Stinnett announced her pregnancy to her online community, which included Montgomery. Id.
In spring 2004, Montgomery began telling her friends, family, and online community that she was pregnant. Id. Montgomery reported testing positive for pregnancy, began wearing maternity clothes, and began behaving as if she were pregnant. Id. Still unaware of her sterilization, Kevin and her children believed her. Id. Some of Montgomery's acquaintances believed that she was pregnant and showed signs of pregnancy, but others did not. Id. Those who knew that Montgomery had been sterilized—including Boman and his wife—accused her of deceiving her family. Id. She responded that she would prove them wrong. Id.
Montgomery contacted Stinnett using an alias on December 15, 2004, expressing interest in one of her puppies and agreeing to meet at her home the next day. Id. Montgomery then drove to Stinnett's home at the appointed time, carrying with her in her jacket a sharp kitchen knife and a white cord. Id. After playing with the puppies outside, the women entered the home. Id. Stinnett was eight months pregnant at the time. Id.
Sometime between 2:30 p.m. and shortly after 3:30 p.m., Montgomery attacked Stinnett, using the cord to strangle Stinnett until she was unconscious. Id. She then used the kitchen knife to cut into Stinnett's abdomen, causing her to regain consciousness. Id. A struggle ensued, and Montgomery strangled Stinnett a second time, killing her. Id. at 1079–80. Montgomery then extracted the premature baby from Stinnett's mutilated body, cut the umbilical cord, and fled the scene. Id. at 1080. Shortly thereafter, Stinnett's mother found her daughter lying on the living room floor, covered in blood. Id. She said that Stinnett's stomach looked like it had exploded. Id.
Following the murder and kidnapping, Montgomery placed the infant in a car seat, told Kevin that she gave birth at a women's clinic, and returned home pretending that the child was hers. Id. Shortly thereafter, she confessed to the crime and the child was safely returned to the father. Id.
At trial, Montgomery asserted an insanity defense premised upon the evaluations of defense mental health experts Drs. Vilayanur Ramachandran and William Logan, both of whom diagnosed her with depression, borderline personality disorder
, post-traumatic stress disorder, and pseudocyesis. Id. at 1082. The American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual's revised fourth edition defines pseudocyesis as a somatoform disorder associated with a false belief of being pregnant associated with objective signs of pregnancy, including physiological changes. Id.
Dr. Ramachandran testified that Montgomery suffered from a severe pseudocyesis delusion and was in a dissociative state when she killed Stinnett and delivered the baby. Id. at 1083. In his opinion, her history of childhood sexual abuse and post-traumatic stress disorder predisposed her for pseudocyesis and that she maintained her delusion through internet research on cesarean sections, home birth, and related topics, as well as her purchases of maternity clothes, a home birth kit, and a baby nursery. Id. Though the details of her delusion fluctuated, Dr. Ramachandran believed that changes in Montgomery's delusional state were designed to accommodate the delusion and not signs of malingering, which he defined as a planned volition or lie. Id. at 1083–84.
The Government's mental health expert, Dr. Park Dietz, disagreed, testifying that Montgomery did not have a sincere belief that she was pregnant and therefore did not suffer from pseudocyesis
at the time of the murder. Id. at 1083. He cited evidence showing...
To continue reading
Request your trial