566 F. App'x 231
4th Cir.2014Background
- On Sept. 13, 2009, deputies responded to a call from Henry Hearn’s ex‑wife; they located a campsite and a five‑page handwritten notepad addressed to her that Hearn had written.
- Deputy Donovan Small encountered and arrested Hearn for criminal domestic violence and transported him to the Lancaster County Detention Center. Small discussed the notepad with Hearn during transport; Hearn said it was a goodbye and denied medical problems.
- Small turned the notepad over to Sergeant Mitzi Snipes at booking; Snipes skimmed it for contraband and did not read it fully. She conducted a standard medical/suicide screening; Hearn denied suicidal thoughts and appeared calm and cooperative.
- Lieutenant Chuck Kirkley reviewed the notepad and told Small to treat it as personal property. Sergeant James Whitaker had seen the notepad earlier at the campsite but left before Hearn was arrested and never interacted with him.
- About three hours after booking, Hearn hanged himself in his cell. The estate sued several officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging deliberate indifference to a substantial suicide risk; district court granted summary judgment for defendants for lack of subjective knowledge. Appeal affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Deputy Small was deliberately indifferent to a substantial suicide risk | Small read the note and questioned Hearn about it, so he must have subjectively known Hearn was suicidal | The note lacks an explicit suicide threat; Hearn denied suicidal intent and medical issues when asked; Small’s questions show he investigated, not ignored, risk | No triable issue: note ambiguous, Hearn’s denials and Small’s follow‑up defeat finding of subjective knowledge or deliberate indifference |
| Whether Lieutenant Kirkley was deliberately indifferent after reading the note | Kirkley read the same note and took no further action, so he must have known and was indifferent | Note was ambiguous; no evidence Kirkley subjectively recognized his inaction as constitutionally inadequate | No triable issue: ambiguous note and no evidence Kirkley appreciated that his response was insufficient |
| Whether Sergeant Whitaker is liable for deliberate indifference | Whitaker read the note at campsite and did nothing further | Whitaker left before arrest and had no contact or supervisory involvement with Hearn | No liability: no personal involvement or knowledge linking Whitaker to deprivation under § 1983 |
| Whether Sergeant Snipes (booking officer) was deliberately indifferent | Snipes should have inferred risk from facts (e.g., no emergency contact, notepad) despite Hearn’s denials | Snipes did not read the note, was not told of concerns, asked suicide question to which Hearn answered "no," and observed calm demeanor | No triable issue: absence of notice or objective warning she actually knew of suicide risk—at most negligent conduct |
Key Cases Cited
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (deliberate indifference requires subjective awareness of substantial risk)
- Parrish ex rel. Lee v. Cleveland, 372 F.3d 294 (4th Cir.: two‑part deliberate indifference test for pretrial detainees)
- Brice v. Virginia Beach Correctional Center, 58 F.3d 101 (risk may be so obvious that officer must have known)
- Gordon v. Kidd, 971 F.2d 1087 (absence of prior threat/attempt undermines deliberate indifference in suicide cases)
- Brown v. Harris, 240 F.3d 383 (assessing substantiality of perceived risk in light of what officer observed/was told)