United States v. Hewitt

• Decision Date: 08 June 2021
• Docket Number: No. 20-2402,20-2402
• Citation: 999 F.3d 1141
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee v. Travis HEWITT Defendant - Appellant
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

999 F.3d 1141

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee

v.Travis HEWITT Defendant - Appellant

No. 20-2402

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: February 19, 2021

Filed: June 8, 2021

Tovah Calderon, Alisa Philo, U.S. Department of Justice, Appellate Section, Fara Gold, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Criminal Section, Washington, DC, David M. Ketchmark, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Kansas City, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Travis Hewitt, Federal Correctional Institution, Oakdale, LA, Pro Se.

Angela L. Williams, Federal Public Defender's Office, Kansas City, MO, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before SMITH, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Former Jackson County Detention Center (JCDC) Corrections Officer Travis Hewitt appeals his conviction for (1) conspiring to deprive James Ramirez, a pretrial detainee, of his civil rights, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 241 ; and (2) depriving Ramirez of his civil rights, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence for both of his convictions and the reasonableness of his sentence. We affirm the judgment of the district court.¹

I. Background²

On July 2, 2015, Ramirez was admitted to the JCDC in advance of a hearing on an alleged probation violation. At the time of his admission, he was suffering from alcohol withdrawal. He was placed in the medical housing unit on the second floor of the JCDC so that staff could monitor his status and provide him with medication.

While in the medical housing unit, Ramirez was "unaware of where he was at," "confused," and "disoriented." Trial Tr. vol. 2, at 92, 106, 107, United States v. Hewitt , No. 4:17-cr-00136-GAF (W.D. Mo. 2020), ECF No. 209. On July 4, 2015, at approximately 7 p.m., Ramirez attempted to leave the medical housing unit. Corrections Officer Irene Haines struggled with Ramirez before radioing a "code one officer involved." Id. at 93. This radio call indicated that "an officer needs assistance immediately." Id.

Hewitt and Corrections Officer Dakota Pearce were on the fourth floor of the JCDC when they heard the radio call. They immediately went to the medical housing unit on the second floor. Hewitt "[t]hrew [Ramirez] to the ground." Id. at 293. Pearce handcuffed him behind his back. While Ramirez was handcuffed and on the ground, Pearce punched him "more than once" in the side with a closed fist "out of anger" for Ramirez fighting with a female staff member. Id. at 298. Pearce also witnessed Hewitt "punch[ ] Mr. Ramirez in the face at least three times" with a closed fist. Id . at 299. Corrections Officers Shavon Brown and Katie Milton observed the incident from the doorway of the medical housing unit. Brown saw Hewitt hit Ramirez in the face "[m]ultiple" times with "[s]hort, close jabs." Trial Tr. vol. 1, at 67, United States v. Hewitt , No. 4:17-cr-00136-GAF (W.D. Mo. 2020), ECF No. 208. Milton saw Hewitt "deliver[ ] approximately five blows to [Ramirez's] face" in "short, backhanded hits." Trial Tr. vol. 2, at 99–100. Hewitt admitted to hitting Ramirez in "three rapid strikes," but he claimed he did so in response to Ramirez biting him. Trial Tr. vol. 4, at 169, United States v. Hewitt , No. 4:17-cr-00136-GAF (W.D. Mo. 2020), ECF No. 211. He wrote in his report that he used "suppressive force" in response to Ramirez biting him. Id. at 131.

The Control Emergency Response Team (CERT) arrived minutes later. CERT Team Officers Jen-I Pulos and Terrance Dooley took Ramirez to a nearby holding cell for medical evaluation.

Following the incident, officers took a break outside on the porch on the first floor. The officers began discussing the code one. While "[e]verybody was pretty upset about it," Hewitt "was upset the most. He ... verbally voiced that you don't put your hands on women, you don't do that." Trial Tr. vol. 2, at 308. He also stated, "I bet ... [Ramirez's] mouth doesn't feel too good after that." Id. at 104. Hewitt "was walking around with his chest kind of puffed up a little bit." Id. He "said that he was happy that he had got his licks in." Trial Tr. vol. 3, at 290, United States v. Hewitt , No. 4:17-cr-00136-GAF (W.D. Mo. 2020), ECF No. 210.

Around 9:30 p.m., Pearce asked Hewitt to accompany him to Ramirez's cell to deliver medication. After departing Ramirez's cell, the two officers discussed a comb they claimed to have seen in the cell that had been altered into a shank. Hewitt was "very adamant about going and getting it and not wanting to get the lieutenant involved." Trial Tr. vol. 2, at 322–23. But Pearce "went and spoke with the lieutenant about it." Id. at 322. The lieutenant instructed Pearce to "[g]o get [the shank]." Id. at 324.

Shortly thereafter, Pearce returned to the second floor. Upon his return, Pearce saw Brown, Pulos, Dooley, and Hewitt in a semicircle around the second-floor desk. Brown was on the phone with the lieutenant, who instructed her to go retrieve the shank out of Ramirez's cell. In response, Hewitt stated, "F**k that, Brown. We got it." Id. at 330. Hewitt was "quite upset." Id.

At approximately 10:30 p.m., Pulos and Dooley went to Ramirez's cell in the medical housing unit to retrieve the shank. They "detain[ed] [Ramirez] on the floor of his cell" and "put him in wrist restraints

and leg restraints." Trial Tr. vol. 3, at 303. Pulos and Dooley then walked Ramirez to a large holding cell without surveillance cameras on the second floor. They "expected to inflict pain on" Ramirez when they got to the holding cell. Id. at 307.

Once inside the holding cell, Pulos put Ramirez on the floor with his hands behind his back, still handcuffed. Using his full weight, Pulos put his knee into Ramirez's back twice "[t]o inflict pain and to let him know to never do this again to another officer." Id. at 310. Ramirez was not threatening or resisting. Pulos then got up, and "Dooley proceed[ed] to take his turn," stating, "Now it's time for me to get my licks in." Id. at 311. Dooley punched Ramirez twice in the face with full force.

"At this point, Officer Hewitt walk[ed] into the cell ...." Id. at 312. Hewitt told Ramirez, "You think that was bad, you haven't—ain't nothing happened yet." Id. Hewitt proceeded to yell and cuss at Ramirez, stating, "You're not going to f***ing do anything like this" and "You got away with not going in the restraint chair." Id. at 313. Next, Hewitt "punche[d] [Ramirez] in the face, and then he proceed[ed] to then kick him in his back." Id. According to Pearce, who had also entered the cell, "Hewitt picked Inmate Ramirez up by his jumpsuit and threw him against the wall." Trial Tr. vol.2, at 343.

Afterwards, Hewitt warned Pulos and Pearce to stay quiet. He told Pulos, "If you f***ing say anything about this, I will kill you." Trial Tr. vol. 3, at 317. And Hewitt told Pearce that "[he] was next" if he said anything. Trial Tr. vol. 2, at 350.

Around 3:30 a.m. the next morning, Jennifer Wood, the registered nurse on duty, requested that Ramirez be sent to the hospital "[b]ecause his vital signs were outside of the normal range with some of what he was experiencing." Id. at 202. Wood was unaware of Ramirez's physical injuries; she sent him to the hospital "to rule out alcohol withdrawal." Id. at 203.

Ramirez was taken to Truman Medical Center, where he was treated by Dr. Adam Stuppy. Although Dr. Stuppy "was expecting to be treating a gentleman for alcohol withdrawal," he was instead "faced with a gentleman who had obviously suffered ... some traumatic injuries." Id. at 268. Dr. Stuppy diagnosed Ramirez with pulmonary contusion

(bruising of the lung); pneumothorax (punctured lung or collapsed lung); homothorax (internal bleeding); facial contusions (facial bruising); multiple rib fractures ; thoracic spine injury ; spinal fractures ; and a wrist fracture. According to Dr. Stuppy, Ramirez's injuries were "consistent with blunt force trauma." Id. at 270.

Following the incident, Hewitt, Pearce, Dooley, and Pulos were indicted for conspiring to deprive Ramirez of his civil rights, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 241 ("Count 1"), and depriving Ramirez of his civil rights, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242 ("Count 2"). Hewitt and Pearce were also charged with the earlier altercation that occurred in the medical housing unit. Both were charged with depriving Ramirez of his civil rights, in violation of § 242 ("Count 3"), and Hewitt was charged with making a false entry in a document with the intent to impede, obstruct, and influence the investigation and proper administration of that matter, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1519 ("Count 4"). Prior to trial, Pulos pleaded guilty to Count 2, and Pearce pleaded guilty to Count 1. Hewitt and Dooley pleaded not guilty and proceeded to trial. The jury found Hewitt and Dooley guilty on Counts 1 and 2. The jury acquitted Hewitt on Counts 3 and 4.

At sentencing, the district court calculated a Guidelines range of 87 to 108 months’ imprisonment. Neither party objected to this sentencing range. Hewitt requested time served or, alternatively, a sentence no longer than the 36-month sentence that the court had imposed on Dooley. The government asked the court to impose a Guidelines sentence.

Hewitt objected to information included in the presentence report (PSR) relating to the first incident in the medical housing unit for which he had been acquitted. The court denied the objection, stating, "I think that it's proper to have that in the presentence report, but none of the matters that relate to the charges for which Mr. Hewitt was acquitted are matters that I take into consideration at all in terms of fashioning an appropriate sentence." Sentencing Tr. at 6, United States v. Hewitt , No. 4:17-cr-00136-GAF (W.D. Mo. 2020), ECF No. 251.

Ultimately, the district court varied downward from the Guidelines range and sentenced Hewitt to 45 months’ imprisonment on Counts 1 and 2, to run concurrently. The court characterized Hewitt's conduct as "a horrendous...