The federal appeals court based in Denver decided on Monday that five Eagle County sheriff’s officials cannot be held liable for the death of a jail detainee who allegedly was a known suicide risk prior to his arrest.

The ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit marked the second time in as many months that a panel of appellate judges reversed U.S. District Court Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney’s initial decision to deny qualified immunity to law enforcement officers accused of constitutional violations. Both times, 10th Circuit judges believed Sweeney’s analysis was flawed and incomplete.

In the case of Nathan Timothy Simon, a three-judge appellate panel concluded there was no indication the deputies who transported Simon to the jail – and allegedly knew he was at risk of harming himself – violated any clearly established constitutional right.

Then, once Simon arrived at the jail, the lawsuit “does not plausibly allege the supervisors had actual knowledge of Mr. Simon’s substantial risk of suicide,” wrote Judge Scott M. Matheson Jr. in the 10th Circuit’s Dec. 11 order.

In recent years, multiple detainees have died in the Eagle County jail, including a suicide this April. At the time of Simon’s death in August 2019, Sheriff James van Beek published an opinion article to address the twin suicides of Simon and another detainee, explaining that incarcerated people may learn to “hide their symptoms” of suicidality.

“There is a continual need to establish a balance between securing the jail from any implements which might be used for self-harm, and consideration that even while in detention, it is thoughtful to include such comforts as sheets and certain items of clothing to maintain a degree of normalcy,” van Beek wrote.

Case: Estate of Simon v. van Beek

Decided: December 11, 2023

Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for Colorado

Ruling: 3-0

Judges: Scott M. Matheson Jr. (author)

Timothy M. Tymkovich

Joel M. Carson III

Background: Reports: Eagle County jail was aware of mental health issues of recent inmates who died by suicide

Challenging the notion that the jail had struck the proper balance, the lawsuit filed by Simon’s surviving parents alleged van Beek and others were liable not only for negligence, but for knowing about the risk Simon posed to himself and disregarding it.

According to the lawsuit, the sheriff’s office was aware in early 2019 that Simon was exhibiting signs of suicidality on multiple occasions. On Aug. 2, deputies arrested Simon and he was released on bond the following morning.

That same day, Simon’s parents called 911 to report Simon was threatening to kill himself.

Deputies Dustin Oakley and Scott Peterson apprehended Simon for an alleged bond violation. Simon told Oakley he was “having a hard time with a lot of personal issues” and began crying on the trip to jail. Peterson, who spoke with Simon’s parents, allegedly learned Simon would attempt to lie and say he was not suicidal.

Neither deputy allegedly communicated those red flags to jail staff. Instead, an emergency medical technician screened Simon and found no suicide-prevention measures were necessary. Two days later, a state judge referred Simon to a mental health intervention program and sent her order immediately to the sheriff’s office.

However, shortly after Simon returned to the jail, he died by suicide using implements in his cell.

Last October, Sweeney addressed whether Oakley, Peterson and three supervisors at the jail should receive qualified immunity. Qualified immunity generally shields government employees from liability unless they violate a person’s clearly established legal rights. She denied the request, believing the state judge’s order put the supervisors on notice that Simon was suicidal.

As for Oakey and Peterson, they allegedly “were aware that Nathan was a suicide risk on August 3, 2019, detained Nathan with this knowledge, and then failed to communicate this information to the staff,” Sweeney wrote.

The defendants appealed. During oral arguments before the 10th Circuit, their lawyer contended it would be hard to prove that the arresting deputies who left Simon in the custody of jail staff, plus the high-level supervisors at the facility, were liable for Simon’s death.

“Shouldn’t the patrol officers have some duty, obligation, responsibility to pass on to the – when you hand off an arrestee to the jail – to pass along the information they have so that there can be a holistic assessment of that person’s state of mind, mental condition and, certainly, their history of suicide threats?” asked Judge Timothy M. Tymkovich.

“All signals were there was a suicide risk,” added Matheson.

Attorney Josh A. Marks acknowledged that “in a perfect world,” it would have been better for the arresting deputies to say something about Simon’s inclination to cover up his suicidality. But the deputies “kept him safe while they had him.”

The panel reversed Sweeney’s decision to deny qualified immunity on two grounds. First, Sweeney had not properly considered whether any prior court cases existed that would put the arresting deputies on notice they had committed a constitutional violation by failing to communicate with jail staff.

Second, her reliance on the state judge’s order referring Simon to a mental health program did not support the idea that the specific jail supervisors were aware of Simon’s suicide risk and disregarded it.

Although the 10th Circuit’s decision narrowed the claims remaining in the lawsuit, the litigation will move forward on allegations that the sheriff’s office’s policies contributed to Simon’s death and that the jail’s medical provider was negligent.

Last month, a different 10th Circuit panel reversed Sweeney’s denial of qualified immunity in a case out of Rifle, in which a police officer fatally shot a suicidal man who was running away. Sweeney issued her decision in October 2022, the same month she ruled in Simon’s case and shortly after she took the bench as a district judge.

The 10th Circuit found Sweeney misinterpreted the facts of the Rifle case and failed to address all of the necessary legal criteria to determine if the defendants were liable for a constitutional violation.

The case is Estate of Simon et al. v. van Beek et al.

If you or someone you know is experiencing suicidal thoughts or a crisis, call 844-493-TALK (8255) or text “TALK” to 38255 or call or text 988.