A federal judge last month dismissed a lawsuit from an incarcerated man who claimed a doctor violated his rights by sticking a needle into his unnumbed eyeball, causing extensive damage.

Ronald Lee Smith, who is incarcerated at Buena Vista Correctional Facility, alleged he was taken to Denver Health in July 2021. While there, ophthalmologist Maryam Ghiassi allegedly stuck a needle “directly into my unprotected eye,” rendering Smith almost completely blind. Ghiassi also allegedly failed to conduct a follow-up appointment.

Smith sued Ghiassi for exhibiting deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Such claims require that government officials knew about and disregarded a substantial risk to health or safety.

“Mr. Smith’s complaint that he was negligently administered an intraocular medication without adequate anesthetic amounts to no more than disagreement with the judgment of a medical provider,” wrote attorney John L. Conklin on behalf of Ghiassi. “The allegations in the operative Complaint do not plausibly allege that Dr. Ghiassi was aware of a serious medical need or risk of harm, nor that she consciously disregarded that risk.”

In response to Ghiassi’s motion to dismiss, Smith expanded on his allegations of the encounter, including that Smith “jerked totally out of the medical chair” and writhed in “unbearable pain and agony” while Ghiassi stood “with a bloody needle in her hand.”

“She disregarded her duty to treat her patient,” wrote Smith, who represented himself.

But in a May 9 order, U.S. Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter wrote that Smith had not credibly alleged Ghiassi committed a constitutional violation because there was no indication she knew his eye was unnumbed. At most, it was a “botched” procedure.

“As to the injection into Plaintiff’s eyeball, Plaintiff does not allege that it was unnecessary, that he did not consent to it, or that Defendant was not qualified to perform the procedure,” wrote Neureiter. “But even if this supports an inference that Defendant’s treatment decision was somehow negligent, or even grossly negligent, that is still insufficient to state a deliberate indifference claim.”

The case is Smith v. Ghiassi.