Christian Williams v. County of San Mateo

MEMORANDUM *

Christian Williams appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in favor of defendants Sheriff Don Horsley, the San Mateo County Sheriff Department, and the County of San Mateo. We reverse. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and legal history of this case, we need not recount it here.

There are genuine issues of material fact as to plaintiffs claim that he was subject *346 to unconstitutional punishment in violation of his Fourteenth Amendment rights. If a civil detainee is held under conditions similar to or more restrictive than the conditions imposed on criminal detainees, then a presumption arises that the detention is punitive and violates the civil detainee’s rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 932 (9th Cir.2004).

Williams alleges that, although he was a civil detainee, he was treated the same as, or sometimes more restrictively than, criminal detainees. On its face, the affidavit by Greg Trindle, the Assistant Sheriff for San Mateo County, indicates that civil detainees were treated the same as criminal detainees. The Williams and Trindle affidavits also create genuine…

dissenting in part:

Because a supervisor who lacks knowledge of any risk to inmate health or safety cannot be deliberately indifferent to such risk, the majority errs in concluding that Williams raised a genuine issue of material fact as to Sheriff Horsley’s liability.

*347 We use a “deliberate indifference” standard to analyze claims that a prison official violated pretrial detainees’ constitutional rights by subjecting them to punitive treatment. Clouthier v. Cnty. of Contra Costa, 591 F.3d 1232, 1241 (9th Cir.2010). Under this standard, a pretrial detainee must show that the prison official both was “ ‘aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists,’ ” and also actually drew that inference. Id. at 1242 (quoting Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994)). The Supreme Court has made it clear that government officials are not liable for the misdeeds of their subordinates; rather, officials can be held liable under § 1983 only for their “own individual actions” that violate the Constitution. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 676 , 129 S.Ct. 1937 , 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009).

Here, Williams has…

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 02 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CHRISTIAN R. WILLIAMS, No. 08-17747

Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 5:03-cv-05158-RMW

v.

MEMORANDUM *

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO; SHERIFF

OF SAN MATEO COUNTY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Ronald M. Whyte, Senior District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted February 15, 2012 San Francisco, California

Before: THOMAS, FISHER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

Christian Williams appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in favor of defendants Sheriff Don Horsley, the San

Mateo County Sheriff Department, and the County of San Mateo. We reverse.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and legal history of this case, we

need not recount it here.

There are genuine issues of material fact as to plaintiff’s claim…