CDCR Acted with Deliberate Indifference to Risks of COVID-19

The petition was filed in the First Appellate District Court in San Francisco, which ordered the Warden of San Quentin Prison to show cause why relief should not be granted to transfer petitioner to a suitable quarantine location.

After reviewing the Warden’s response, the First Appellate District agreed with Von Staich that the CDCR acted with deliberate indifference and relief is warranted.

In coming to this ruling, the First Appellate District explained that the risks of COVID-19 had been known, or should have been known, at least no later than March 4, 2020 when Governor Newsom declared a state of emergency for California and a week later, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic, noting “the alarming levels of spread and severity.”

Prisons and jails have long been associated with inordinately high transmission probabilities for infectious diseases. Indeed, early in 2020, physicians and public health officials sounded the alarm that prisons and jails could become the “epicenter of the pandemic.” Prisons and jails often operate well beyond their capacities, and California’s 35 adult prisons were no exception. Windows are often welded shut for security and ventilation is often quite limited for security.

Recognizing this risk, the CDCR did suspend the intake of prisoners from county jails and juvenile halls to adult prisons and did institute programs to expedite the release of certain classes of prisoners.

Despite these efforts, however, there have been more than 2,200 confirmed cases of COVID-19 among San Quentin inmates and 28 deaths as of October 16, 2020.

The catalyst for the outbreak of COVID-19 infections and deaths was the transfer by CDCR of 121 inmates from the California Institute for Men (CIM) in Chino to San Quentin, which was part of an effort to control the spread of the virus at CIM. The CIM inmates transferred to San Quentin had not been tested for up to a month before the transfer. Some of the transferred inmates immediately became ill after entering San Quentin and several tested positive shortly after arrival. For days, the transferred inmates used the same showers and ate in the same dining hall as the other San Quentin inmates, which numbered about 3,500.

After the outbreak of COVID-19 at San Quentin, with over 1,400 inmates infected, the prison sought guidance what to do and an “Urgent Memo” was created that outlined steps to take. However, implementing the Urgent Memo’s recommendation was slow and haphazard, the prison acknowledged, but explained that it was due to safety issues, leading the First Appellate District to find that the CDCR treated inmates’ medical needs with deliberate indifference.

The First Appellate District then ordered that Von Staich be “immediately” removed from San Quentin to another CDCR facility that can provide the necessary physical distancing and other measures to protect against COVID-19. The CDCR was also ordered to release on parole or transfer to another correctional facility enough prisoners to reduce the prison population to 1,775 inmates. The First District specified for special attention those inmates over age 60 and those who have served over 25 years of their sentence and are eligible for parole, including even life prisoners and second and third strikers, even if such prisoners are serving time for a violent offense.

The citation for the First Appellate District Court ruling discussed above is In re Ivan Von Staich (1st App. Dist., 2020) 56 Cal. App. 5th 53, 270 Cal. Rptr. 3d 128.

For more information about health issues in jail or prison, please click on the following articles: