Opinion ID: 673674
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Officer Stoudemire

Text: 33 Although it is undisputed that Officer Stoudemire had no knowledge of Leitzsey's suicidal tendencies prior to arresting him, Plaintiff Leitzsey asserts that Stoudemire was deliberately indifferent to a serious risk of suicide by Leitzsey because Leitzsey had large, recent scars on both of his arms; Stoudemire witnessed a conversation between Leitzsey and his mother that upset Leitzsey; and as reflected on the booking report, Stoudemire knew that Leitzsey had a history of drug use. In addition, Plaintiff Leitzsey relies on the fact that Leitzsey's prior suicide attempt was referenced in incident reports on file with the City of Cayce. 34 Stoudemire's failure to recognize that the scars on Leitzsey's arms, Leitzsey's telephone call to his mother, and Leitzsey's history of drug use indicated suicidal tendencies on his part was at most simple negligence. Moreover, because there is no requirement that officers screen detainees for a risk of suicide, Stoudemire's failure to investigate the prior incident reports does not amount to deliberate indifference. Thus, because Stoudemire had no reason to know that Leitzsey had suicidal tendencies, Stoudemire is entitled to qualified immunity.