Tenth Circuit Blackmon v. Sutton 12-3199

Decision here.

   In 1997, Blackmon (who was 11) at the time was being detained in a juvenile facility pending a trial on rape charges (which were eventually thrown out).  Sutton was the director of that facility.  During his stay, Blackmon was suicidal and was frequently confined to a restraint chair either to prevent him from harming himself or to punish him for disobedience.  There were a variety of other punishments used against him during his stay at the facility as well.

   Now an adult with mental health problems, Blackmon is suing the facility and various members of the staff for violating his rights by way of the punishments he endured, by denying him access to mental health care, and refusing to transfer him to an unlocked facility of his choice.  The trial court denied qualified immunity, and the defendants appealed.

   The Tenth Circuit denied qualified immunity on most of those points.  They did rule that Sutton was entitle to qualified immunity regarding her refusal to transfer him to another facility.  People being detained don't have a right to choose their place of detention.  As far as the other points go... the government can use force to prevent people in its custody from hurting themselves, or to maintain order within the facility.  But absent a conviction, the government can't use force to punish someone.  Nor can they use force for no reason.  Since the allegation is that the restraint chair was used to punish Blackmon, qualified immunity was denied.

   The case has more relevance to jailers than to cops, but it's here because cops sometimes have to deal with presentence confinement issues.