Looking to navigate the complexities of public safety policy development and management? Lexipol is your go-to source for state-specific, fully developed policy services. Designed by industry experts and legal professionals, Lexipol helps your agency stay up to date with the latest standards, laws and best practices. Contact Lexipol at 844-312-9500 for expert assistance or request a demo.
BROWN V. DICKEY, 2024 WL 4023245 (1st Cir. 2024)
Jaden Brown was incarcerated at the Cumberland County Jail when she went into labor. She was transported to Maine Medical Center for childbirth. In violation of jail policy, officers Daniel Haskell and Sam Dickey were present in her room in the hours leading up to childbirth. According to Brown, the officers were able to observe her naked body during medical examinations and the delivery of her baby.
Brown sued the two officers for allegedly violating her privacy. A trial judge denied qualified immunity, ruling there were genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the officers’ observations of Brown’s naked body were more than inadvertent, occasional, casual or restricted. The court also found such observations would constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment. Both officers appealed.
During testimony, a female officer who had been supervising Brown noted that as she ended her shift, she reminded officer Dickey jail policy prevented officers from being in “the delivery room when a person who is incarcerated is giving birth.” An officer’s presence during childbirth is also prohibited by state law in Maine, as it is in many states. Notwithstanding, “Dickey and Haskell sat in Brown’s hospital room continuously throughout Brown’s labor and delivery until the following morning after Brown’s child was born.” Brown alleged “Dickey was close enough to her that she could have touched him. Haskell sat on the other end of the bench, within four feet of Brown.” Brown perceived the officers were positioned “so that they could see, hear, and smell everything that was happening while she labored and delivered her baby.”
When a hospital staff member told officer Dickey he should not be in the room during delivery, Dickey asked Brown, “Did I f$*#king make you feel uncomfortable in any way?” Officer Haskell spoke to Brown about another female inmate who had accused him of having sex with her, asking Brown, “Can you believe it? You know my type. Is she my type?”
The appellate court affirmed the denial of qualified immunity for the two officers. After all, the officers had not been able to point to a version of the facts that would support their claim to qualified immunity: “The record evidence fails to incontrovertibly establish a single version of events showing Haskell or Dickey did not observe Brown’s naked body while they were in her hospital room.” The appellate court emphasized a search does not require deliberate intent to inspect a naked body and such observations could violate clearly established law. “A search occurs when a jail official inspects an incarcerated individual’s naked body, regardless of whether the official set out to do so. If Haskell or Dickey inspected Brown’s naked body in the hospital room, such an observation would, constitute a search triggering Fourth Amendment scrutiny.”
The court further observed, “Haskell and Dickey both had engaged previously in inappropriate conduct with females who were incarcerated, suggesting that their observations of Brown’s naked body were not inadvertent. Dickey had been previously demoted for an inappropriate relationship with a female who was incarcerated.” Brown claimed she had watched female inmates strip naked for Haskell. The sheriff fired Dickey, though he got his job back after his union intervened.
Read more Ken Wallentine case reviews here.
This article was featured in Lexipol’s Xiphos newsletter, a monthly legal-focused law enforcement newsletter authored by Ken Wallentine. Subscriptions are free for public safety officers, educators and public attorneys. Subscribe here!
