By Jim Cline and Sam Hagshenas
In an Arbitration decision between the Cuyahoga County Sheriff’s Office and Ohio Patrolman’s Benevolent Association, the Arbitrator reduced the punishment of a corrections officer who had grabbed the neck of an inmate. At issue was County policy that designated application of force to someone’s neck as “deadly force.”
This arbitration stemmed from an arrest of a woman, who had been booked for stabbing her boyfriend. While this woman was being processed in the jail, she acted erratically, yelling, gesticulating, and even dancing in front of the booking window. The booking officer issued multiple orders for the woman to sit down, which were all ignored. This led to a heated exchange, and the booking officer attempted to forcefully place the woman in a chair. Video of the incident showed the booking officer grab the woman by the throat while pushing her into the chair.
The officer was investigated both by the Sheriff’s Internal Affairs Unit and County Human Resources, who both found that the officer violated the County’s use of force policy. The officer was given a 15-day unpaid suspension, and was criminally charged with assault and unlawful restraint, although the officer entered a diversion program and the case was dismissed.
The Union grieved the officer’s discipline, arguing that the extremely brief and minimal nature of the contact with the inmate’s neck failed to establish any use of deadly force. The Union argued the force may have been “unnecessary,” which could lead to a maximum five-day suspension, but was not excessive or deadly as alleged by the County.
The County on the other hand noted that two separate investigations reached the same conclusion that excessive force had been used. They noted their Use of Force Policy defined application of force to the throat or neck of another as “deadly force,” and that the officer’s discipline was appropriate under the circumstances.
Although County policy designated the application of force to an inmate’s neck as “deadly force,” the Arbitrator noted that this same definition required that force used must carry “a substantial risk that will it result in the death of an individual.” Additionally, the County discounted the permissible uses of force outlined in the policy, which allowed force to be used to subdue an inmate who is not listening to commands. The Arbitrator thus found that the County failed to prove such force was deadly, but that discipline for “unnecessary physical contact was appropriate. The Arbitrator still found the situation to warranted discipline, as:
“Unnecessary contact with the neck/throat is far more serious than virtually any other unnecessary physical contact within inmate.”
The Arbitrator held that the officer should have received a five rather than fifteen-day suspension, consistent with the County’s use of unnecessary force policy. The County was ordered to provide back pay for this 80-hour difference.
**Visit our Premium Website for more information on An Overview of the Just Cause Standard and Practical Considerations**
