Eastern District of California Blog

Sacramento jail guards keep jobs after abusing inmates

[Patrick] Hoyt’s file is one of 79 internal affairs and jail-abuse case file that Sheriff Scott Jones’ office released this year to Sacramento civil rights attorney Mark Merin in an unrelated case. The county turned over the files under a court order requiring Merin to keep them confidential and return or destroy them once his case concluded.

Instead, Merin later objected to giving up the documents, and The Bee subsequently intervened in the case in federal court, arguing that the confidential order violated the First Amendment. In October, U.S. Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan lifted the order and released hundreds of pages to The Bee.

The result is the largest-ever release of internal affairs and jail abuse complaints involving deputies working inside Sacramento’s Main Jail downtown and the Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center in Elk Grove. They include allegations of beatings, misuse of pepper spray, an illegal body cavity search, efforts to avoid being caught on video surveillance and recommendations of deputy discipline and firings.

“The files are a treasure trove of complaints, incident reports ... and citizens complaints,” Merin said. “It’s a record of jail abuse at the Sacramento County jail from the moment people reach the door until the time they’re let out.”

Merin said the documents show “abuse is rampant and people who commit it are undisciplined, so there’s no discouragement to excessive force and the result is that people are injured and many people sue.”

The sheriff’s office says no deputies accused in the documents of abusing inmates were fired. Two deputies in the Hoyt case were recommended for termination, but that was later rejected by the sheriff in favor of suspensions. Other penalties range from a letter of discipline — the lowest form of punishment but one that can affect a deputy’s ability to seek promotion or other assignments — to suspensions without pay.

Sac Bee, 12/22/19

Impending EDCA Court Judicial Shortage?

In June, the EDCA district judges sent a letter to Congress warning that the district's heavy caseloads were soon to get much worse due to the expected retirement of one or more district judges.  Six months later, we are that much closer to the predicted judicial crisis.  Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr.'s last calendar is today, Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. is out for a few months on medical leave, and Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill retires at the end of January.   Although I've heard rumors of potential judicial nominees, there doesn't appear to be much movement toward increasing the number of EDCA judgeships and it is unlikely that we'll get any new judges to replace the retirees anytime soon.  Expect heavier dockets and more case delays.

On my end, as the year ends, I'm hoping to catch up and start blogging more regularly again.  Happy Holidays!

EDCA Court Critical of California Prisons' Care of Mentally-Ill Inmates

In a sternly worded order, a federal judge has found California’s top prison officials intentionally filed misleading data to the court on how frequently mentally ill inmates receive psychiatric care, and she signaled that court oversight of mental health care inside prisons will continue until the state meets its constitutional obligations to prisoners.

The order by U.S. District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller in Sacramento federal court also validates claims by by Dr. Michael Golding, the state prison system’s chief psychiatrist, who compiled a secret whistleblower report last year accusing the state of providing false and misleading data to the court to cover up woefully inadequate psychiatric care.

Mueller found that the state was so determined to get out from under years of court-ordered supervision of mental health care services that it fudged data on how frequently more than 32,000 mentally ill inmates were being seen by psychiatrists and the amount of care that was being provided.

“In the final analysis, inexplicably, it is apparent defendants lost complete sight of the reasons remediation is required here,” the judge wrote in a 49-page order issued late Tuesday. “Defendants adopted a laser focus in an effort to obtain termination of court supervision, which led to a stark ‘ends justify the means’ approach.

Sac Bee, 12/18/19