Opinion ID: 6343803
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Night of April 15-164

Text: By the evening of April 15, Mr. Beauford had been refusing all medications, including his anti-seizure medicine, for the past three days. That evening and through the early morning of April 16, defendant Deputies Dalrymple and Perkinson were on 4 A written summary of MCDF’s video surveillance footage recorded on the night of April 15 and the early morning hours of April 16 is part of the appellate record, but the video itself is not. The video summary provides precise timestamps of the events at issue in this appeal. See Aplt. App. vol. 8 at 2383. The video summary appears to be consistent with the other record evidence, but there is a slight difference—about a two-minute discrepancy—between some of the times documented in the video-summary timestamps and the time of events described by the deputies in their interviews and depositions. Any discrepancy in the times reported and documented is minor, so it does not impact our analysis of the merits. Unless otherwise noted, we rely on the times reported by the deputies, as the district court did, and look to the video summary to fill in any gaps. 5 Appellate Case: 21-1010 Document: 010110688637 Date Filed: 05/25/2022 Page: 6 duty in Cedar Pod, along with Nurse Workman. Officers on the night shift conducted inmate security checks every half hour as required by MCDF policy. The exact time of each security check was recorded in the jail’s computer system. While one officer performed the security check, the other officer staffed the pod station. Officers also assisted the on-duty nurse with medication rounds and took inmate head counts. Deputies Dalrymple and Perkinson each conducted security checks from 6:00 p.m. to 7:20 p.m. on April 15 and observed no issue with any inmate. Aplt. App. vol. 8 at 2282-83. During a security check at 7:50 p.m., Deputy Perkinson stepped into Mr. Beauford’s cell to pick up a dinner tray. He observed Mr. Beauford grunting underneath his blanket. Deputy Perkinson thought Mr. Beauford was probably masturbating and otherwise “seemed normal,” so he did not talk to him. Id. at 2283. “[A]ll seemed okay” with Mr. Beauford during the next security check at 8:20 p.m. Id. Around 8:40 p.m., Deputy Perkinson and Nurse Workman were on medication rounds when they came to Mr. Beauford’s cell and observed him “on the bed, and completely covered by a blanket.” Id. Deputy Perkinson first thought Mr. Beauford might be masturbating again. But “due to how he was shaking” and knowing that Mr. Beauford was an epileptic, Deputy Perkinson “had a second thought that Mr. Beauford may be seizing.” Id. Deputy Perkinson and Nurse Workman entered Mr. Beauford’s cell and discovered he was having a seizure. Nurse Workman turned Mr. Beauford on his side and sat with him through the duration of the seizure, which 6 Appellate Case: 21-1010 Document: 010110688637 Date Filed: 05/25/2022 Page: 7 lasted five more minutes. Deputy Perkinson and Nurse Workman then left Mr. Beauford’s cell at 8:49 p.m. to finish medication rounds. Id. at 2383. At 9:01 p.m., Deputy Dalrymple performed another security check. Id. He looked into Mr. Beauford’s cell and saw him lying on his bed shaking with his eyes open. Deputy Dalrymple said nothing to Mr. Beauford and continued on to complete his check of other inmates. When interviewed by an MCDF officer a few hours after Mr. Beauford died, Deputy Dalrymple said he reported the shaking to Deputy Perkinson, who had assured him that, according to Nurse Workman, Mr. Beauford would be “fine.” Id. at 2282. At his deposition, Deputy Dalrymple likewise testified he had reported the shaking to someone but was uncertain whether he told Deputy Perkinson or Nurse Workman. Id. at 2311. Deputy Perkinson and Nurse Workman returned to Mr. Beauford’s cell at 9:21 p.m. Id. at 2284, 2383. Mr. Beauford refused to let Nurse Workman take his vitals and asked them to leave. Nurse Workman assured Deputy Perkinson that Mr. Beauford would be fine and she did not instruct the deputies to conduct extra monitoring of Mr. Beauford. The deputies completed more security checks about every half-hour over the next several hours, and each time, observed Mr. Beauford laying on his bed, reading 7 Appellate Case: 21-1010 Document: 010110688637 Date Filed: 05/25/2022 Page: 8 or sleeping. After doing a security round at 10:15 p.m., Deputy Perkinson moved off Cedar Pod to other duties, leaving Deputy Dalrymple as the only officer on the pod.5 During his security check at 11:55 p.m., Deputy Dalrymple saw Mr. Beauford laying on the floor of his cell, facedown, with his head under his desk. Id. at 2281, 2310. Deputy Dalrymple used his flashlight to illuminate Mr. Beauford and watched him for a few moments. He knew Mr. Beauford often slept in unusual positions in his cell and believed Mr. Beauford was breathing because he saw Mr. Beauford’s covers rising and falling. Id. at 2282. Deputy Dalrymple then finished his security check and returned to the pod officer station. On his next security round at around 12:15 a.m.,6 Deputy Dalrymple observed Mr. Beauford lying motionless in the same position on the floor of his cell. This time, however, Deputy Dalrymple “could not tell for sure” if Mr. Beauford was breathing. Id. at 2282-83. After completing his security check, Deputy Dalrymple alerted medical personnel he had observed Mr. Beauford lying on the floor of his cell. “About ten minutes passed between Deputy Dalrymple’s observation and his call to 5 Deputy Dalrymple took a lunch break around this time, so two other deputies—including one deputy trainee—oversaw Cedar Pod and did the security checks at 11:00 p.m. and 11:30 p.m. They did not note any concerns about Mr. Beauford or any other inmate; neither officer is named as a defendant in this case. 6 The parties rely on Deputy Dalrymple’s recollection that the time was “about” 12:15 a.m., but the video summary documents this event at 12:17 a.m. Compare Aplt. App. vol. 8 at 2282 with 2383. 8 Appellate Case: 21-1010 Document: 010110688637 Date Filed: 05/25/2022 Page: 9 the [MCDF] medical staff.” Aplt. App. vol. 12 at 3293. Around 12:25 a.m.,7 Deputy Dalrymple and Nurse Workman entered Mr. Beauford’s cell and found him unresponsive. Nurse Workman retrieved a medical kit while Deputy Dalrymple started CPR and other staff called 911. Deputies moved Mr. Beauford into the “dayroom area outside the cell door in order to have room for resuscitation.” Aplt. App. vol. 6 at 1548. Nurse Workman used a portable defibrillator and deputies performed chest compressions until paramedics arrived. These rescue efforts were unavailing. Mr. Beauford was pronounced dead at approximately 2:45 a.m. on April 16, 2014. Aplt. App. vol. 7 at 1924. An autopsy concluded Mr. Beauford suffered “[s]udden unexpected death in epilepsy.” Id. at 1926; see also id. at 1923. Toxicology tests showed low blood concentrations of four anti-seizure medications.