Opinion ID: 2495239
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Walker's Detention

Text: Although Chief Owens was not directly involved in the administration of the jail in July 2002, ultimatelythrough several layers of bureaucracyhe was responsible for the hiring of its officers, for its operations, and for the development and enforcement of its policies. Chief Owens testified that, in July 2002, the City had a jail nurse who was on duty Monday through Friday during regular business hours and who was on call at nights and during the weekends. The jail nurse on duty at the time of Walker's detention has not been positively identified. During discovery, three nurses were identified as potentially being the nurse on duty. However, one never worked as a jail nurse, another was never deposed, and the third did not recall Walker and could not confirm whether she was on duty during Walker's detention. It is unclear whether the jail nurse was employed by the City or by a local hospital that had a contract with the City to provide nursing services for the jail. Walker requested that the City and the hospital produce the contract if it existed; however, neither entity could locate a contract. At the time of their depositions, none of the detention officers on duty during Walker's detention remembered her. As a result, and because of Walker's amnesia and the lack of information regarding the jail nurse, all the facts known about Walker's detention come from the jail records. Notably, on February 1, 2003, just a few days after Walker notified the City of her claims, administration of the jail was transferred from the City to Madison County pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement. Chief Owens testified that the transfer occurred because of cost-management issues and that, after the transfer, the jail was administered by the county and housed both city and county prisoners. A detention officer who was employed at the jail during the transfer testified at her deposition that there was so much chaos, I don't know where the paperwork or half of the things went. The jail records presented by the parties to the trial court show the following facts regarding Walker's detention and the jail policies in place at that time. The City had several written operations policies regarding inmates who were intoxicated or in need of medical care. Policy No. B-106 required booking officers to complete a form, which the jail personnel generally referred to as the medical questionnaire, as soon as the inmate [was] cooperative enough to answer questions. The policy stated: If during the completion of the form it is determined to deny admission of the inmate until medical clearance is obtained, the Detention Supervisor or Detention Officer in Charge (DOIC) will complete as much of the ... form as possible and complete a Denial of Admission Form. . . . . . . . The following types of new inmates will be denied admission to the facility until evaluated by the jail nurse. If the jail nurse is unavailable, the arresting officer will transport the inmate to the City of Huntsville approved medical provider for proper treatment and clearance. Inmates who are unconscious; Inmates who are having or who have recently had convulsions; Inmates with any significant external bleeding; Inmates with any obvious fractures; Inmates with signs of head injuries; Inmates with neck or spinal injuries; Inmates with any type of serious injury; Inmates who cannot walk under their own power; Inmates who display symptoms of internal bleeding; Inmates with abdominal bleeding; Pregnant women in labor; Pregnant women with any other serious problem(s); Extremely intoxicated or incapacitated behavior; Breathing difficulties; Seizures; Apparent hallucinations; and/or Other serious indications. The jail nurse will maintain all inmate medical screening records. Separately, Policy No. B-108 stated the jail policies and procedures related to intoxicated inmates. That policy stated: Inmates who appear to be under the influence of alcohol or other drugs will be housed in Close Observation Cells until the Detention Supervisor or Detention Officer in Charge (DOIC) determines that frequent observation is no longer necessary. Inmates who demonstrate potentially serious medical conditions to include but not limited to the following will be denied admission until evaluated by the jail nurse or City of Huntsville approved medical services provider: Unconsciousness; Extremely intoxicated or incapacitated behavior; Breathing difficulties; Convulsions; Seizures; Apparent hallucinations; and/or Other serious indications. Staff will observe inmates housed in Close Observation Cells at least every fifteen (15) minutes, and staff will document each observation. Inmates will be transferred to the appropriate housing unit when a Detention Supervisor determines that the inmate is no longer a threat to themselves, other inmates, staff or the security of the facility. Policy No. B-108 does not define the term [e]xtremely intoxicated or incapacitated behavior, and the detention officers did not receive any specific training on how to identify it. Chief Owens testified that, in his opinion, Policy No. B-108 was not discretionary, except that the determination whether an inmate was extremely intoxicated or incapacitated required a judgment call ... requires a human being to exercise their subjective judgment. Chief Owens testified that detention officers at the jail were trained and certified annually in basic life support and CPR. Policy No. F-109 required jail personnel to provide medical care to any inmate with an emergency medical need and stated procedures for providing that care once it was determined that an inmate required it. The policy, however, did not state any guidelines for determining when an inmate had an emergency medical need. The deposed detention officers stated that they did not receive any specific training on how to recognize serious medical conditions such as a stroke or head injuries when there was no broken skin. The jail records show that Walker was booked upon her arrival at the jail and that a booking report was created at approximately 6:00 p.m. Walker was not admitted into the housing area of the jail where multiple inmates were held in a single, large cell. Instead, Walker was assigned a cell in the booking area. Several detention officers stated in their depositions that intoxicated inmates were kept in individual holding cells in the booking area where they could be observed until they were sober enough to be held safely in the housing area. A handwritten log entry in a book used by the detention officers to pass information from one shift to the next stated: 1805 [6:05 p.m.]Julia Walker intoxicated at time of booking unable to get prints and do medical. A medical questionnaire was created for Walker on July 29, 2002, at 1:16 a.m. Several parts of the questionnaire are left blank, including the name of the booking officer, the name of the reviewing nurse, and the line for Walker's signature. There is some testimony to the effect that Walker would have signed an original copy of the questionnaire; however, other testimony indicates that the record was kept by computer only and that a hard copy of the questionnaire with Walker's signature might never have been created. That part of the questionnaire answered by the detention officer states that Walker was conscious, that she did not have any obvious pain or bleeding or other symptoms suggesting need for emergency service, and that she did not have any visible signs of trauma or illness requiring immediate emergency or doctor's care. Interestingly, the questionnaire also states that Walker did not appear to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs. That part of the questionnaire answered by Walker states that she had not recently fainted or had a head injury and that she did not have any other medical problems the detention officers should know about. An entry in the surveillance log states: 8:00 Nurse checked Pentecost, Walker, Wynne and Vinny. Pentecost and Vinny good to go to housing. Wynne and Walker will need to be housed in booking till later date. As stated above, the identity of the nurse who checked Walker remains unknown. The nurse who could not recall whether she was on duty during Walker's detention stated that she completed written forms when she saw an inmate and that those forms were kept in a filing cabinet in an exam room at the jail. She also testified: Not every contact with a patient or inmate requires written documentation. She explained that, if the inmate was not having physical troubles or she did not observe anything remarkable or abnormal, then there was nothing to say and no need to document the contact. The surveillance log next stated that at 8:05 a.m. Walker and two other inmates were sent to video arraignment. A computerized entry in Walker's inmate log shows that she was moved from her cell to the municipal court at 8:55 a.m. Although it is unclear precisely when, Walker signed an affidavit-of-indigency form requesting appointed counsel in which she identified her employer, stated her weekly income, her monthly expenses, her marital status, and the fact that she had two adult children. The municipal court denied her request for indigency status. Municipal court records show that, at her arraignment, Walker pleaded not guilty, and her case was set for trial on September 10, 2002. Walker's inmate log shows that she was returned from municipal court to her cell at approximately 1:03 p.m. The surveillance log, however, does not specifically state when Walker returned, but states: 11:30 Court overseveral inmates brought down. All other entries in the surveillance logs created during Walker's detention say all ok, all quiet and secure, or state information regarding other inmates. No other log entries mention Walker by name. Entries in the surveillance logs were made every 30 minutes, not every 15 as required by the jail-operations policy. Rosser testified that she saw Walker at the jail the day after Walker's arrest, although she did not recall what time. Rosser stated that she saw Walker walking around the booking area outside her cell and that Walker was talking to herself, looking in other rooms and cells, and bouncing off the walls. Rosser saw Walker for less than five minutes, did not talk to her, and was not close enough to tell if she still appeared to be under the influence of narcotics. Walker did not make any telephone calls while she was at the jail. Several detention officers testified that telephones were located in the jail's housing area to which Walker was never admitted. However, there is no evidence indicating that Walker requested and was denied access to a telephone. Walker was released to the custody of her sons on the afternoon of July 29, 2002. Her inmate log shows that she left the jail at 4:15 p.m.