3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR

United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi.

United States v. Hinds Cnty.

Decided Feb 4, 2022

3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR RDC has been troubled since it opened in 1994.

From its inception, “the jail designed to improve
02-04-2022
conditions for detainees has faced a myriad of
United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Hinds problems: structural deficiencies, chronic
County, et al. Defendants. understaffing and poor management. But fixing
those problems ha[s] been elusive under whatever
CARLTON W. REEVES, UNITED STATES sheriff and Hinds County Board of Supervisors are
DISTRICT JUDGE in elected office at a given time.” Kayode Crown,
One Jail's Tale: Hinds County Detention Center At
Before Carlton W. Reeves, District Judge.
Risk Of Federal Takeover, Miss. Free Press (Oct.
FIRST ORDER OF CONTEMPT 15, 2021).

CARLTON W. REEVES, UNITED STATES Captain Diane Riley testified shortly after RDC's
DISTRICT JUDGE opening that “the new jail's doors were inadequate
to provide security.” Dean v. Thomas, 933 F.Supp.
The United States Department of Justice brought 600, 608 (S.D.Miss. 1996). That is, the cell doors
this action to end unconstitutional conditions of failed to lock. Nearly three decades later, the cell
confinement at Hinds County's Raymond doors still fail to lock. See Docket No. 94 at 4
Detention Center (RDC). [hereinafter Fourteenth Monitoring Report]; see
In 2016, Hinds County's Board of Supervisors also Ruth Ingram, Year after riot, cell doors at
promised to fix the problems by agreeing to a Hinds County jail still don't lock, Clarion-Ledger
Consent Decree. In 2020, facing the threat of (July 23, 2013); Ruth Ingram, Officials: 'Antsy'
being held in contempt of court, the Board of juvenile inmates flood area at Hinds jail in
Supervisors again promised to fix the problems by Raymond, Clarion-Ledger (July 19, 2013) (“We
1 agreeing to a Stipulated Order. *1 have doors with no locks, ” the Sheriff's
spokesman candidly admitted.); Docket No. 31 at
It is now 2022. Many of the problems the Board 20 (“the Jail continues to lack even the most basic
promised to address have not been corrected. security and safety features, such as lockable cell
Specifically, the County is non-compliant with doors . . . .”); Docket No. 60 at 4 (“At RDC, doors
more than two dozen provisions of the Consent and locks are broken. Prisoners can break out of
Decree. 2 their *2 cells, break out of their housing units and
As explained below, therefore, Hinds County and even enter a jail control room.”).
its Board of Supervisors are in contempt of court. A significant riot in 2012 brought the facility's
I. Factual and Procedural History problems to the forefront. “[P]risoners destroyed
fixtures and walls, sprayed water hoses and fire
extinguishers, and left ceilings in shambles, ” the

1
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

State's newspaper of record reported. Ruth condition and inadequately staffed.” Docket No.
Ingram, Jail getting repairs; much more needed, 3-4 at 5.
Clarion-Ledger (Nov. 7, 2012). “It's no secret that
In 2014 and 2015, the U.S. Department of Justice's
the door locks need to be replaced, ” Chief Deputy
Civil Rights Division investigated conditions at
Chris Picou added. “I don't know that the jail has
RDC and the two other facilities that comprise
ever been up to industry standards.” Id.
Hinds County's jail system: the Work Center and
A series of escapes in 2012 and 2013 shed the downtown jail. Docket No. 3-1. It concluded
additional light upon the conditions at the jail. See that the County was violating the Eighth and
Ruth Ingram, Escape draws attention to jail, Fourteenth Amendments by, among other things
policies, Clarion-Ledger (Apr. 22, 2013) described in its 29-page report, failing to provide
(“Escapes this year and last have been blamed on “minimum levels of protection from violence, ”
faulty locks and security for jail and cell doors. failing to have “sufficient numbers of trained staff,
The county last year ordered emergency repairs in ” and incarcerating persons “beyond their court-
April on doors that had been problematic and a ordered release dates.” Docket No. 3-3 at 2-3. The
security risk since the facility opened in 1994.”). problems had resulted in “at least three major
Sheriff Tyrone Lewis, who had commissioned a riots, two alleged homicides, and numerous
500-page report on the previous administration, assaults on prisoners and staff members.” Id. at 2.
blamed the escapes on “malfunctioning doors and The Findings Letter resulted in the Mississippi
conditions at the aging facility.” Monique Valeris, Department of Corrections moving its state
Lewis says he's not pointing blame at McMillin, inmates from RDC. State inmates removed from
WAPT (Aug. 8, 2012). troubled jail in Hinds County, Corrections 1 (May
27, 2015). “[W]e believe removing the state
In 2013, Hinds County Circuit Judge Tomie Green
inmates is in the best interest of the State of
convened a special grand jury to investigate
Mississippi and the inmates, ” said State
conditions at RDC. The reporting this time
Corrections Commissioner Marshall Fisher. Id.
centered on safety concerns:
The Department of Justice filed this lawsuit in
On Sunday, a SWAT team stormed the
2016. Its complaint described an inability to meet
facility after a dozen inmates broke out of
minimum constitutional standards with respect to
their cells, in part because of faulty locks.
4 detainee-on-detainee violence, *4 staff-on-
Last week, a group of juveniles flooded a
detainee violence, “dangerously low staffing
portion of the jail by turning on a fire
levels, ” jail policies and procedures, housing and
hydrant. Reports also surfaced that
classification systems, the physical plant, internal
3 *3 investigations, detention of persons who should
several inmates were stabbed and a have been released, and the treatment of juvenile
number of deputies and jailers sustained and suicidal detainees. Docket No. 1 at 3-5. The
minor injuries. In June, one inmate died Department alleged that the constitutional
and another was hurt in a string of violent violations “have been obvious and known to
episodes that also left three deputies with Defendants for a substantial period of time.” Id. at
injuries. 5. The Attorney General herself signed the
complaint. Id. at 7, 10.
Emily Le Coz, Grand jury probes Hinds jail
issues, Clarion-Ledger (July 26, 2013). The grand The parties immediately entered into a Consent
jury concluded that RDC was “in a deplorable Decree. Docket Nos. 3; 8-1. The Consent Decree
required Hinds County to implement dozens of

2
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

minimal constitutional standards. Hinds County In 2019, the Department of Justice filed a Motion
expressly stipulated that the Consent Decree was for an Order to Show Cause outlining a litany of
“narrowly drawn, extends no further than ongoing constitutional violations at RDC. Docket
necessary to correct the violations of federal No. 31. It described the County's “continued
rights, ” and “is the least intrusive means failure to comply with nearly all provisions of the
necessary to correct these violations.” Docket No. Settlement, including provisions regarding
8-1 at 61. security, medical screening, suicide prevention,
mental health care, youth services, fire safety,
A Monitoring Team was also established. Id. at
sanitary conditions, and release procedures.” Id. at
54; see also Docket No. 10; Gates v. Collier, 501
5. As any elementary school child understands, the
F.2d 1291, 1321 (5th Cir. 1974). It includes
County was flunking, miserably. The result was
Elizabeth Simpson, David Parrish, Jim Moeser,
rioting, stabbings, a murder, staff-on-detainee
and Dr. Richard Dudley. They are subject-matter
assaults, and a “major disturbance” during a
experts in corrections, corrections operations,
Monitoring Team site visit that resulted in eight
juvenile justice, and corrections mental health,
emergency room transports. Id. at 7-8, 14. The
respectively. The Monitors began to provide
Department added that the situation on the ground
technical assistance, conduct regular site visits,
was “likely worse” than it could adequately
and serve as the eyes and ears of the Court1 as the
summarize because of poor record-keeping at
parties attempted to meet the requirements of the
RDC. Id. at 8.
5 Consent Decree. *5
Hinds County again avoided significant litigation,
1 The Consent Decree and Monitoring Team
and possible sanctions, by agreeing to a Stipulated
were approved by U.S. District Judge
Order. See Docket Nos. 60 and 60-1; accord Plata
William H. Barbour, Jr. The case was
transferred to the undersigned in December
6 v. Schwarzenegger, 603 F.3d 1088, *6 1091 (9th
2018 upon Judge Barbour taking senior Cir. 2010). By the parties' admission, the
status. Immediately upon being assigned Stipulated Order was “designed by the parties to
the case, this Court held a status be additional relief, ” and “d[id] not replace the
conference and “received an update as to Court's original consent decree.” Docket No. 55 at
the progress toward compliance with the 5. Instead, the Stipulated Order focused on the
Consent Agreement from the parties and areas of “greatest concern, ” i.e., “[t]he locks not
the Court Appointed Monitor.” See Minute working, ” “repairs to the physical plant, ” and
Entry of Jan. 15, 2019. “staffing enhancements, the creation of a staffing
plan, better use of staff, recruitment, and
Hinds County's efforts have borne fruit at one of
retention.” Id. at 16.
its jails-the Work Center.2 The Monitoring Team
describes the Work Center as a functional jail for At a December 6, 2019 hearing, the parties also
the citizens of Hinds County. See, e.g., Fourteenth addressed the lack of a qualified jail administrator.
Monitoring Report at 29. This Court's own visits Hinds County conceded that it did not “currently
to the facilities confirms that the Work Center have an administrator who meets the requirements
largely operates as a jail should. of Paragraph 38 of the agreement.” Id. at 34.
2 Hinds Accordingly, the Stipulated Agreement mandated
County's third facility, the
downtown jail, was closed in 2020.
“that the county hire somebody who does have
those qualifications.” Id.
The story is not the same for RDC.

3
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

When the Court inquired about the ability of the Monitoring continued; periodic status conferences
then-sitting Board of Supervisors to bind future were held. The facility limped along into the
Boards to the Stipulated Agreement, the attorney present.
for the County assured the Court that such
The situation deteriorated significantly in 2021.
concerns were misplaced. He cited to Judge Bar-
According to the Fourteenth Monitoring Report,
bour's prior observation that “it was irrelevant who
the board was, ” as “[i]t's the county that is the There were a record number of fights and
party, and the county has constitutional obligations assaults at RDC in May [2021], there
that it must obey.” Id. at 55. As another attorney continue to be fires set by inmates, there is
put it, “[y]ou don't get a fresh slate when you an extremely large amount of contraband
come into office.” Id. at 56. Regardless of in the facility including drugs, there have
personnel changes, the County was bound to been a number of overdoses although no
follow the Stipulated Agreement. At the close of deaths from those overdoses, and there
the hearing, the attorney for the County entered a have been three deaths, two by suicide.
statement on the record, professing a desire to Although there is some cause for
“make sure that the incoming supervisors,
8 *8
regardless of who they choose as counsel, know
optimism with the new Detention
those words well, ” and quoted the Court's earlier
Administrator being hired3, this is a very
warning that if the County “'remains uninterested
in fixing this problem, the government will be disturbing trend.
7 doomed *7 to repeat it and repeatedly have to Fourteenth Monitoring Report at 3 (emphasis
defend it in federal court.'” Counsel assured the added).
Court that he and the County did “wholeheartedly
3 The Monitoring Team reports that the
hear” the Court's concerns regarding conditions at
(now-departed) Detention Administrator,
RDC. Id. at 99. He then, “on behalf of the county,
Major Kathryn Bryan, is “very well
” vowed to “continue doing everything we can for
qualified.” Fourteenth Monitoring Report
whatever time we represent the county to make
at 3. Indeed, at a status conference
sure that no one is treated inhumanely at . . . following Major Bryan's hiring, counsel for
county detention facilities.” Id. the County declared that Major Bryan
“comes with a wealth of information” and
This Court begrudgingly approved their agreement
that “[t]he sheriff has 1, 000 percent faith
even though the County had reached sustained
and trust in her.” Docket No. 93 at 52. The
compliance “in only one of the 92 requirements of
County's attorney went on to state that
the Consent Decree.” Docket No. 60 at 7. “While
“now with the addition of Ms. Bryan, I can
a finding of contempt is warranted, ” the represent to the Court that things are going
undersigned wrote, “the parties' stipulated order to be evolving at a very rapid pace, at a
outlines what is perhaps the most comprehensive very positive pace, and the safety and
remedial plan for Hinds County to become security of our inmates and our staff is the
compliant that the Court has seen from the number one priority of the sheriff.” Id. at
parties.” Id. at 11. “Ten months from today, the 67. The Sheriff was even more effusive.
County should have made significant progress on Analogizing to basketball, the Sheriff
developing and implementing policies, making expressed his complete backing of Major

repairs to the physical plant and ensuring Bryan, emphasizing that “there's no need in

incarcerated youth have necessary programming, having Michael Jordan on your team if
you're not going to let him shoot the ball.”
among other necessary investments.” Id.
Id. at 60.

4
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

The situation became more uncertain when Sheriff supposed to be on duty at booking was not at his
Vance, the elected official with primary post. “The last documented well-being check was
responsibility for RDC, passed away from made at 1105, more than three hours before the
COVID-19 on August 3, 2021. On August 16, incident.” Id. Again, no after-action report was
2021, the Board of Supervisors appointed completed.
Marshand Crisler to be Interim Sheriff. Marshand
The third death occurred on July 6. It was another
Crisler named interim Hinds County Sheriff,
death by hanging-although the available record is
Jackson Advocate (Aug. 16, 2021).
silent on whether it was a suicide. The Officer
On October 18, 2021, RDC experienced its sixth charged with performing 30-mi-nute head counts
death of the year. The Monitoring Team filed an “left the unit” for unknown reasons. Id. at 3. When
emergency report on October 27 characterizing the he returned to look in, he did so from a vantage
pattern of deaths as “especially alarming.” Docket point “from where he could not possibly see each
No. 96 at 2 [hereinafter October 27 Emergency inmate to conduct an accurate count.” Id. Again,
Monitoring Report]. no after-action report was completed.

A brief summary of each death is provided here. Death number four was a drug overdose on
August 3. “An IAD investigation is still underway,
The first death, on March 19, 2021, happened
10 but inmates on the unit *10 reported that they had
when a nurse ordered an arrestee to be taken to the
been calling for assistance for five hours and that
hospital and no one carried out her order. Id. The
there had been no response to their cries for help.”
9 arrestee subsequently collapsed. An *9 oxygen
Id. The condition of the body indicated that the
concentrator was obtained but would not turn on
detainee had been dead for some time when he
because the electrical outlet was faulty. Someone
was discovered. Again, no after-action report has
ran to get an AED (automated external
been completed.
defibrillator) unit from Medical, but the AED unit
had no pads. The arrestee died. RDC staff then The fifth death occurred the next day, when a
“took the position that he was not an inmate detainee died in the hospital from COVID
because he had not been accepted/booked.” Id. An complications. “Although the death appears to be
after-action report has not been completed for this medically related, ” the Monitoring Team wrote,
death.4 “there are questions regarding when his symptoms
first appeared and whether they were timely and
4 An after-action report is a way for officials
adequately responded to as well as . . . the
and monitors to “gather facts, identify
adequacy of the precautions being taken by the
problems, examine staff performance, and
develop a plan to prevent future” major
Jail to prevent the spread of the virus.” Id. No
disturbances. Depriest v. Walnut Grove investigation into his death was conducted.
Corr. Auth., No. 3:10-CV-663-CWR-FKB,
The sixth death warrants a few more details. On
2015 WL 3795020, at *11 (S.D.Miss. June
October 18, was an assault in a unit where the
10, 2015).
doors do not lock and staff supervision is
The second death, on April 18, was a suicide by a “minimal.” Id. The Monitors' description relayed
detainee being housed in a booking cell, a practice the following:
“that the Monitoring Team has repeatedly stated
should not be done and is contrary to the
Settlement Agreement.” Id. The Officer who
discovered the body could not enter the unit
because he lacked keys, and the Officer who was

5
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

At about 0430 or 0500 in the morning, Tyree Jones won the runoff election later that
video footage showed the inmate being hit night. He was sworn into office in December 2021
in the head by another inmate. A third and presently serves as Hinds County Sheriff.
inmate then stomped on his head several
On January 31, 2022, Major Bryan was relieved of
times. He was then dragged across the
12 her duties. This Order followed. *12
mezzanine. The video footage shows brief
movement by the decedent and then none II. Law
indicating that he was probably dead at
A. Consent Decrees
that point but a time of death has not been
established. He was eventually dragged “A consent decree is akin to a contract yet also
back and propped in a sitting position and functions as an enforceable judicial order.” United
then later laid on a mat. He was not States v. Chromalloy Am. Corp., 158 F.3d 345, 349
discovered by officers until 1:45, almost 9 (5th Cir. 1998); see also Frew ex rel. Frew v.
hours later. Hawkins, 540 U.S. 431, 437 (2004). Consent
decrees are commonly used to address ongoing
11 *11 Id. at 3-4.5
constitutional violations in jail and prison cases.
5 The County submits that “Major Bryan E.g., DePriest v. Walnut Grove Corr. Auth., No.
personally investigated the incident and 3:10-CV-663-CWR-FKB, 2015 WL 3795020, at
authored the after-action report” for this *3 (S.D.Miss. June 10, 2015).
death. Docket No. 112 at 5.
Although “state and local authorities have primary
The Monitoring Team concluded its Emergency responsibility for curing constitutional violations,
Report with a recommendation “that the Court set ” Hutto v. Finney, 437 U.S. 678, 687 (1978),
a status conference/hearing to address immediate “[f]ederal courts are not reduced to approving
measures that need to be taken to address the consent decrees and hoping for compliance. Once
concerns raised above and prevent the future loss entered, a consent decree may be enforced.” Frew,
of life.” Id. at 5. 540 U.S. at 440.
On November 10, Detention Administrator Bryan B. Stipulations
submitted her letter of resignation. She described
“a distinct lack of support” and relayed in detail a “As a general rule, a stipulation is a judicial
recent directive from the Interim Sheriff that she admission binding on the parties making it, absent
found “reckless and dangerous.” She had served special considerations.” Vallejos v. C. E. Glass
for a total of only five months before submitting Co., 583 F.2d 507, 510 (10th Cir. 1978) (citation
her letter of resignation. She planned to leave in omitted). Because a stipulation concedes “the truth
mid-February 2022. of some alleged fact . . . the fact is thereafter to be
taken for granted; so that the one party need offer
On November 23, 2021 a runoff election was held no evidence to prove it and the other is not
to replace Sheriff Vance. Interim Sheriff Crisler allowed to disprove it.” Vander Linden v. Hodges,
faced off against Tyree Jones, a member of 193 F.3d 268, 279 (4th Cir. 1999) (cleaned up).
Vance's command staff. That same day, after the
polls closed and before the results of the election The Fifth Circuit strictly construes stipulations:
were known, this Court issued an Order to Show Before agreeing to a stipulation, a litigant
Cause directing the County to explain why it has a duty to satisfy himself concerning
should not be held in contempt of court and why a the matters which his opponent proposes
receivership should not be imposed to run RDC. for stipulation.

6
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

13 *13 “In this circuit, at least two requirements must be

Once the stipulation was made, any error met before a party's argument may be judicially
in collating or tabulating its supporting estopped. First, the estopped party's position must
documents was no longer [the plaintiff's] be clearly inconsistent with its previous one, and
responsibility. The ultimate and underlying second, that party must have convinced the court
facts were accepted by and binding upon to accept that previous position.” Gabarick v.
both parties. . . . Once a matter is Laurin Mar. (Am.) Inc., 753 F.3d 550, 553 (5th
stipulated, it should then be laid to rest and Cir. 2014) (cleaned up). That said, the doctrine
should not be inquired into further unless “defies inflexible prerequisites or an exhaustive
the stipulation is vacated by consent or set formula.” Id.
aside by the court.
D. Civil Contempt
Downs v. Am. Emp. Ins. Co., 423 F.2d 1160, 1164-
“Civil . . . contempt is a sanction to enforce
65 (5th Cir. 1970) (citing Wigmore on Evidence).
compliance with an order of the court.” McComb
Courts have every right to rely upon stipulations. v. Jacksonville Paper Co., 336 U.S. 187, 191
“The power of the court to act in the disposition of (1949) (citations omitted). Courts have inherent
a trial upon facts conceded by counsel is as plain power to enforce their orders. Shillitani v. United
as its power to act upon the evidence produced.” States, 384 U.S. 364, 370 (1966). As for consent
Oscanyan v. Arms Co., 103 U.S. 261, 263 (1880). decrees, courts have “the power to enforce and
modify the terms of the decree and to penalize the
C. Judicial Estoppel
noncomplier through contempt proceedings or the
Judicial estoppel is defined as “taking a position issuance of injunctive relief.” B.H. v. McDonald,
clearly inconsistent with an earlier position that 49 F.3d 294, 300 (7th Cir. 1995).
was accepted by a tribunal in circumstances that
To hold a respondent in civil contempt, the
would create an unfair advantage or impose an
moving party must prove by clear and convincing
unfair detriment on an opposing party.” Wright &
evidence: “(1) that a court order was in effect; (2)
Miller, 18B Fed. Prac. & Proc. § 4477 (2d ed.
that the order required certain conduct by the
updated April 2021). As the Supreme Court
respondent; and (3) that the respondent failed to
articulated long ago, “where a party assumes a
comply with the court's order.” Petroleos
certain position in a legal proceeding, and
Mexicanos v. Crawford Enters., 826 F.2d 392, 401
succeeds in maintaining that position, he may not
15 (5th Cir. 1987). *15
thereafter, simply because his interests have
changed, assume a contrary position, especially if “The contemptuous actions need not be willful so
it be to the prejudice of the party who has long as the contemnor actually failed to comply
acquiesced in the position formerly taken . . . .” with the court's order.” Am. Airlines, Inc. v. Allied
14 Davis v. Wakelee, 156 U.S. 680, 689 (1895). *14 Pilots Ass'n, 228 F.3d 574, 581 (5th Cir. 2000).
That means “[g]ood faith is not a defense to civil
The purpose of judicial estoppel “is to protect the
contempt.” Chao v. Transocean Offshore, Inc., 276
integrity of the judicial process by prohibiting
F.3d 725, 728 (5th Cir. 2002). “An act does not
parties from deliberately changing positions
cease to be a violation of a law and of a decree
according to the exigencies of the moment.” New
merely because it may have been done
Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742, 749-50 (2001)
innocently.” McComb, 336 U.S. at 191.
(cleaned up). The doctrine is an equitable one
“invoked by a court at its discretion.” Id. (citation
omitted).

7
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

“If a state agency refuses to adhere to a court improvements at the RDC continue to take hold
order, a financial penalty may be the most and move forward.”6 Id. at 5. But this Court
effective means of insuring compliance.” Frew, visited RDC last week. It looked substantially the
540 U.S. at 440 (citation omitted); see also Am. same as when the Court visited nearly three years
Airlines, 228 F.3d at 585. ago.

III. Discussion 6 We do not know whether Major Bryan was

fired or resigned. Testimony at the

Hinds County's new attorneys have filed a motion evidentiary hearing may shed light on the
to terminate the Consent Decree. Docket No. 111. subject.
After stating for nearly six years that the
provisions of the Consent Decree were necessary Because the County has invoked the termination
and in conformance with the Constitution, the provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act,
County now says that the Consent Decree exceeds the Court will conduct an evidentiary hearing to
“the constitutional minimum necessary to provide determine which parts of the Consent Decree
the County's inmates with basic sustenance.” should continue to govern RDC into the future-if
Docket No. 112 at 2. In short, Hinds County says any. The hearing will commence February 14. The
it is no longer violating its citizens' constitutional public is invited to attend and learn for itself
rights at RDC. whether there are ongoing constitutional violations
at RDC.
Needless to say, the available evidence does not
support this proposition. See, e.g., Docket No. 100 For present purposes, though, the Court confines
at 10-13 and 18-27. The motion instead appears to itself to the contempt issue. To that end, it now
be a last-ditch effort to prevent a federal takeover identifies several provisions of the Consent Decree
of the Raymond Detention Center. 17 that the County is violating, and *17 which
therefore warrant contempt of Court.7 See
Given the evidence contained in the 15
Petroleos Mexicanos, 826 F.2d at 401.
Monitoring Reports, Hinds County's newfound
7 This Order contains the obvious shortfalls-
position is very concerning. Fifth Circuit law on
stipulations and judicial estoppel, recited above, the non-compliant provisions. After the

does not favor parties changing their positions evidentiary hearing, further findings may
issue regarding the 59 requirements on
16 without *16 evidentiary support. Hinds County
which Hinds County is presently in “partial
decided to commit to the Consent Decree and the
compliance.”
Stipulated Order. Twice it agreed that their
provisions were narrowly tailored and the In this inquiry the Court primarily relies upon the
minimum necessary. It should have to live with reports of the Monitoring Team, the subject-matter
that choice until it fixes RDC. experts recommended by the parties and charged
by Judge Barbour with being the eyes and ears of
To all this, the County's new lawyers swear that
the Court. See Eng. v. Cunningham, 269 F.2d 517,
there's a “positive, upward trend of operations at
525 (D.C. Cir. 1959). As the Department of
the RDC.” Docket No. 112 at 4. They minimize
Justice explained in a recent memorandum,
the number of deaths the facility saw last year,
pointing out that there's a new Sheriff in town.
And although the Sheriff's relationship with the
Detention Administrator is “damaged, ” as the
County concedes-so damaged that Major Bryan
just left her job-it then says “operations and

8
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

In many cases involving consent decrees Now to the civil contempt analysis.
and settlements with state and local
The first two elements of the civil contempt
governments, the use of monitors is
standard are easily satisfied. There is no dispute
essential to the successful implementation
that a Court Order was in effect that required
of the decree or agreement. Monitors serve
certain conduct of Hinds County. The County
a crucial role as an independent validator
agreed to a judicially-enforceable contract when
of a jurisdiction's progress in
its (previous) attorneys signed the Consent
implementing the reforms required by a
Decree.
settlement. They are generally selected
after an extensive negotiation between the The remaining element asks whether Hinds
parties, with approval by the supervising County failed to comply with the Court Order.
federal court. Because they are officers of Based on the facts contained in the Fifteenth
the court, monitors act as neutral arbiters Monitoring Report, the answer is a resounding
of a jurisdiction's compliance with a “yes.”
decree, a process that can increase the
Hinds County's termination motion claims as
confidence the Court and stakeholders
victory every provision for which it is in sustained
have in the settlement process.
19 compliance (three of 92 *19 requirements),
Memorandum from Attorney General Merrick substantial compliance (zero requirements), and
Garland to Heads of Civil Litigating Components even partial compliance (59 requirements). See
and United States Attorneys at 2-3 (Sept. 13, Docket No. 112 at 4. But that leaves more than
18 2021); *18 accord Juan F. By & Through Lynch v. two dozen provisions where the County is simply
Weicker, 37 F.3d 874, 880 (2d Cir. 1994) non-compliant with a Court Order. For each of
(“Defendants had conceded that they could not those, the County is in civil contempt.
fully comply with the provisions in the decree, and
The non-compliant paragraphs are as follows:
the monitor's findings, analysis, and
recommendations to the district court, all based on Protection from Harm
ample evidence, did no more than ensure
compliance with the decree . . . . [T]he court 41. Ensure that Jail policies and
monitor [ ], under the consent decree as modified procedures provide for the “direct
by the monitoring order, is the centerpiece of the supervision” of all Jail housing units.
alternative-dispute-resolution process.”). 42. Ensure that the Jail has sufficient
Also at the Court's disposal, however, are staffing to adequately supervise prisoners,
numerous status conferences, hearing transcripts, fulfill the terms of this Agreement, and
and the County's response to the Court's Order to allow for the safe operation of the Jail. . . .
Show Cause. In that response, the County begged (remainder omitted).
this Court to delay its decision on contempt until 43. Include outcome measures as part of
July 1, 2022, so that it could continue “turning the the Jail's internal data collection,
RDC battleship towards a new and better management, and administrative reporting
heading.” Docket No. 105 at 1. Apparently, the process. . . . (remainder omitted).
County and its new attorneys decided to just
abandon ship, and instead spent their time
engineering a position antithetical to all of the
County's prior representations.

9
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

48. Install cell phone jammers or other 61. All uses of force must be reviewed by
electronic equipment to detect, suppress, supervisors who were neither involved in
and deter unauthorized communications nor approved the use of force by the end of
from prisoners in the Jail. Installation must the supervisor's shift. All level 1 uses of
be completed within two years after the force must also be reviewed by a
Effective Date. supervisor of Captain rank or above who
was neither involved in nor approved the
49. Develop and implement a gang
use of force. The purposes of supervisor
program in consultation with qualified
review are to determine whether the use of
experts in the field that addresses any link
force violated Jail policies and procedures,
between gang activity in the community
whether the prisoner's rights may have
and the Jail through appropriate provisions
been violated, and whether further
for education, family or community
investigation or disciplinary action is
involvement, and violence prevention.
required.
20 *20
21 *21
Use of Force Training
62. Reviewing supervisors must document
54. The County must randomly test at least the following: a. Names of all staff
5 percent of Jail Staff members annually to members, pris-oner(s), and other
determine whether they have a meaningful, participants or witnesses interviewed by
working knowledge of all use of force the supervisor; . . . . (remainder omitted)
policies and procedures. The County must
Incident Reporting and Review
also evaluate the results to determine if
any changes to Jail policies and procedures 66. Ensure that Jail supervisors review and
may be necessary and take corrective respond appropriately to incidents. At
action. The results and recommendations minimum: a. Shift commanders must
of such evaluations must be provided to document all report-able incidents by the
the United States and Monitor. end of their shift, but no later than 12
hours after a reportable incident. . . .
Use of Force Supervisor Reviews
(remainder omitted)
60. After any Level 1 use of force,
Sexual Misconduct
responding supervisors will promptly go to
the scene and take the following actions: a. 67. To prevent and remedy violations of
Ensure the safety of everyone involved in prisoners' constitutional rights, the County
or proximate to the incident. . . . must develop and implement policies and
(remainder omitted). procedures to address sexual abuse and
misconduct. Such policies and procedures
must include all of the following: . . . .
(remainder omitted)

Grievance and Prisoner Information

Systems

10
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

72. The grievance system must 95. All individuals who (i) were found not
accommodate prisoners who have physical guilty, were acquitted, or had charges
or cognitive disabilities, are illiterate, or brought against them dismissed, and (ii)
have LEP, so that these prisoners have are not being held on any other matter,
meaningful access to the grievance system. must be released directly from the court
unless the court directs otherwise. . . .
73. The County must ensure that all
(remainder omitted).
current and newly admitted prisoners
23 receive information about prison rules and *23
procedures. . . . (remainder omitted). 96. The County must develop, implement,
and maintain policies and procedures to
22 *22
govern the release of prisoners. . . .
Restrictions on the Use of Segregation
(remainder omitted).
74. Within 8 hours of intake, prisoners in
97. The County must develop, implement,
the booking cells must be classified and
and maintain appropriate post orders
housed in more appropriate long-term
relating to the timely release of
housing where staff will provide access to
individuals. . . . (remainder omitted).
exercise, meals, and other services.
100. The County must annually review its
77. The County must develop and
prisoner release and detention process to
implement restrictions on the segregation
ensure that it complies with any changes in
of prisoners with serious mental illness. . .
federal law, such as the constitutional
. (remainder omitted)
standard for civil or pre-trial detention.
Lawful Basis for Detention
103. The County must require
94. Jail record systems must accurately investigation of all incidents relating to
identify and track all prisoners with serious timely or erroneous prisoner release within
mental illness, including their housing seven calendar days by appropriate
assignment and security incident histories. investigators, supervisors, and the Jail
Jail staff must develop and use records Administrator. The Jail Administrator must
about prisoners with serious mental illness document any deficiencies found and any
to more accurately and efficiently process corrective action taken. The Jail
prisoners requiring forensic evaluations or Administrator must then make any
transport to mental hospitals or other necessary changes to Jail policies and
treatment facilities, and to improve procedures. Such changes should be made,
individual treatment, supervision, and if appropriate, in consultation with court
community transition planning for personnel, the District Attorney's Office,
prisoners with serious mental illness. . . . members of the defense bar, and any other
(remainder omitted). law enforcement agencies involved in
untimely or erroneous prisoner releases.

104. The County must conduct bi-annual

audits of release policies, procedures, and
practices. As part of each audit, the County
must make any necessary changes to
ensure that individuals are

11
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

24 *24 114. Ensure that the Jail's medical staff are

being released in a timely manner. The included as part of the continuous
audits must review all data collected improvement and quality assurance
regarding timely release, including any process. . . . (remainder omitted).
incident reports or Quality Control audits
Criminal Justice Coordinating
referenced in Paragraph 102 above. The
Committee
County must document the audits and
recommendations and must submit all 117. The Coordinating Committee will
documentation to the Monitor and the prioritize enhancing coordination with
United States for review. local behavioral health systems, with the
goal of connecting individuals
Continuous Improvement and Quality
experiencing mental health crisis,
Assurance
including juveniles, with available services
111. Conduct a review, at least annually, to to avoid unnecessary arrest, detention, and
determine whether the incident, use of incarceration.
force, grievance reporting, and IAD
Policy and Procedure Review
systems comply with the requirements of
this Agreement and are effective at 131. The County shall complete its policy
ensuring staff compliance with their and procedure review and revision within
constitutional obligations. The County six months of the Effective Date of this
must make any changes to the reporting Agreement.
systems that it determines are necessary as
133. No. later than three months after the
a result of the system reviews. These
United States' approval of each policy and
reviews and corrective actions must be
procedure, the County must adopt and
documented and provided to the United
begin implementing the policy and
States and Monitor.
procedure, while also modifying all post
113. Develop and implement policies and orders, job descriptions, training materials,
procedures for Jail databases, tracking and performance evaluation instruments in
systems, and computerized records a manner consistent with the policies and
(including the Early Intervention System), procedures.
that ensure both functionality and data
135. The County must annually review its
security. The policies and procedures must
policies and procedures, revising them as
address all of the following issues: data
necessary. . . . (remainder omitted).
storage, data retrieval, data reporting, data
26 analysis and pattern identification, *26
supervisor responsibilities, standards used County Assessment and Compliance
to determine possible violations and Coordinator
corrective action, documentation, legal
issues, staff and prisoner 159. The County must file a self-
assessment compliance report. . . .
25 *25 (remainder omitted).
privacy rights, system security, and audit
mechanisms. Imposition of “an appropriate sanction for that
contempt” is reserved for future proceedings.

12
 United States v. Hinds Cnty. 3:16-CV-489-CWR-RHWR (S.D. Miss. Feb. 4, 2022)

Petroleos Mexicanos, 826 F.2d at 398 (collecting For these reasons, Hinds County and its Board of
cases). Supervisors are hereby found to be in civil
contempt of court.
IV. Conclusion
27 SO ORDERED. *27

13