Filed

Case Background

Our client is a prisoner at Florence McClure Women's Correctional Facility in Southern Nevada. She was sexually abused by a prison chaplain, Donald Burse, on two separate occasions in August 2020. While Burse was fired after the abuse came to light, and there is a pending criminal case, we are taking on this case because we believe that the Nevada Department of Corrections has not done enough to make sure that such abuse will not happen again in the future.

Mr. Burse frequently visited Ms. Flynn’s dorm and, on a specific occasion, asked about her religion and then started making inappropriate sexual comments. Mr. Burse was the institutional chaplain for Florence McClure Women’s Correctional Center. He lured her to his office (inside the chapel of the prison), and Ms. Flynn went under the belief that she would receive a bible. Mr. Burse then asked if she would perform sexual acts on him and allow him to perform sexual acts on her in exchange for him to obtain certain items for her. He then sexually assaulted her in the chapel. Shortly after this sexual assault, Mr. Burse again sexually assaulted Ms. Flynn inside his office and threatened her not to speak of it.

The Eighth Amendment

Under the Eighth Amendment United States Constitution, prisoners are entitled to "humane conditions" while incarcerated. That applies to the physical condition of the prison facilities and proper medical care and also holds prisons accountable when prison staff takes advantage of or abuses prisoners. When a prison staff member sexually assaults a prisoner, it not only violates Nevada law, it also violates the Constitution. Under the Eighth Amendment, sexual assault in prisons doesn't only include forcible rape but also includes sex acts that have been solicited by prison staff through threats of discipline or promising contraband to prisoners. Sexual acts between prison staff and prisoners are rarely legal because a prisoner's consent is rarely legal. This is because the Constitution recognizes that prisoners are particularly vulnerable to predatory actions by staff members. Sexual abuse by staff harms the abused prisoner, but the abuse also threatens the safety of everyone else who works or lives in the facility. It undermines the professionalism and discipline of prison staff and the confidence of incarcerated people that prison staff will protect them from abuse.

Ms. Flynn filed a grievance; it was sustained, and Mr. Burse was terminated. He was charged with three felony counts, and the criminal case is ongoing.

These acts violated Ms. Flynn’s Eighth Amendment Rights and inflicted emotional distress.

What We're Seeking

We are fighting to make sure NDOC is fulfilling its constitutional obligations and that our client and all incarcerated women are protected from future sexual misconduct by prison staff. Our client is seeking injunctive and declaratory relief after being sexually assaulted by Donald Burse more than once.

Through injunctive relief, the goal is to prevent employees, staff, contractors, or agents of NDOC from carrying out and implementing unlawful policies, practices, and acts that create a substantial risk of harm, including sexual assaults, to Ms. Flynn and other inmates and require NDOC to develop and implement policies, procedures, and practices to ensure inmates are protected from harm due to sexual abuse and harassment such as prohibiting inmates from being in an unmonitored area with staff of the opposite gender.

Another practice we are asking for is prohibiting staff members accused of sexual assault/harassment from having contact with inmates, at least until the matter is fully investigated, prosecuted, and dismissed. We also request that all staff have adequate knowledge, skill, and ability to prevent, detect, and respond to sexual abuse, harassment, and grooming by staff members toward individuals in custody.

We are also seeking declaratory relief.

On the other parties:

James Dzurenda serves as the Director of NDOC. Defendant Does 1-10 are unknown employees, staff, contractors, or agents of NDOC who were responsible for hiring, supervising, and monitoring Donald Burse. They were also responsible for developing and implementing NDOC’s policies and procedures on prevention, response, and elimination of sexual assaults within prisons, and aware of the risk of sexual assaults within FMWCC and chose to ignore it. Our claim states that they acted with deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of harm to Ms. Flynn in violation of the 8th Amendment.

Date filed

Friday, July 29, 2022

Court

Federal Court

Judge

Nancy J. Koppe

Case number

2:22-cv-01753
Attorney(s):
Sadmira Ramic, Esq., Christopher M. Peterson, Esq.

Hide banner image

Date

Wednesday, March 27, 2024 - 9:15am

Show featured image

Related issues

Smart Justice People Impacted by Discrimination

Documents

Show related content

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Status

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

Standard with sidebar

Show list numbers

In January 2024, the Clark County Commission voted to establish pedestrian flow zones on the pedestrian bridges at the Las Vegas Strip and charge people with a misdemeanor for stopping or standing on these bridges.  

The First Amendment

Like sidewalks, the pedestrian bridges at the Las Vegas Strip are public forums -- a place where First Amendment protections are strongest. Under this ordinance, First Amendment activity, including artistic performances and political protests -- even stopping to take a selfie -- are not permitted on the bridges. Forcing people from these public forums by criminalizing First Amendment activity violates the Constitution and ignores the fact that these bridges are public property that belongs to everyone.

The Fourteenth Amendment

Due process requires that laws be clear about what conduct is prohibited and requires laws to be enforced against everyone equally. This ordinance is so broad, and it creates too much confusion on what conduct is actually prohibited, banning any stopping or standing on the bridge with the exception of waiting for escalators or elevators. Clark County has indicated that this ordinance should be enforced against street performers who stop to perform while also indicating that the ordinance should not be enforced against tourists who stop to take pictures. The way Clark County has promised to enforce this ordinance conflicts with the plain text and allows law enforcement too much discretion to pick and choose who to charge with a violation of the ordinance.

The Americans with Disabilities Act

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects people with disabilities from being discriminated against for their disability. Some disabilities inhibit a person from physically being able to cross a pedestrian bridge without stopping, but under this ordinance, stopping due to disability is considered a misdemeanor. Criminalizing the act of stopping due to disability discriminates against people with disabilities and directly violates the ADA.

Insufficient Data

The County brought this ordinance forward on the heels of a viral video of ordinary folks stopping on the bridges to catch a glimpse of the F1 race, and under this proposal, those individuals would be considered criminals, even when they pay for publicly funded pedestrian bridges. The laws on the books, if properly enforced, are already sufficient to address the County's problems. It's flawed "data" suggests this ordinance is needed, but there is no indication that LVMPD will start patrolling bridges differently. In effect, this will be a selectively used ordinance meant to target specific people.

Date filed

Friday, February 16, 2024

Court

Nevada District Court

Case number

2:24-cv-00334
Attorney(s):
Christopher M. Peterson, Esq., Tatiana R. Smith, Esq., Margaret A. McLetchie, Esq., Leo S. Wolpert, Esq.

Hide banner image

Date

Friday, February 16, 2024 - 10:30am

Show featured image

Override site-wide featured action/member

Featured image

Pedestrian Flow Zones on The Strip are Unconstitutional. We're Suing!

Related issues

First Amendment

Pinned related content

Documents

Show related content

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Share image

Pedestrian Flow Zones on The Strip are Unconstitutional. We're Suing!

Status

Menu parent dynamic listing

19

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

Standard with sidebar

Show list numbers

The Clark County Detention Center (CCDC) is the largest jail in Nevada, housing thousands of people every year. The ACLU of Nevada has been investigating the treatment of people who are deaf and detained at the Detention Center since April 2021. Based on our investigation, we have determined that the Clark County Detention Center regularly denies basic aids and services to deaf people, including sign language, interpreters, videophones, and visual aids. These services are denied for even the most important communication needs, such as classes meant to rehabilitate prisoners, medical appointments, religious services, and even fire alarms. 

Failure to provide these services functionally places deaf people detained at CCDC in solitary confinement, unable to communicate with staff, other people who are detained, and anyone outside the facility. Based upon records we've received through public records requests, we know the Detention Center is aware it must offer these services but still fails to do so.

Mr. Jones, our client, is a deaf person who has spent over two years in CCDC. Again and again, he requested the services he is entitled to under federal law, and again and again, he was denied, rendering him unable to participate in group therapy, religious services, or other rehabilitative opportunities. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the United States Constitution, and the Nevada Constitution, the Detention Center is obligated to comply and offer appropriate aids and services to deaf people detained at the facility. Together, we are working to make sure he nor any other person who is deaf and detained at jail is treated that way again

What we are seeking:

  • Install videophones in its units. Videophones are the standard telecommunication technology used by the deaf community that has already been safely implemented in jails across the county.
  • Offer ASL interpreters for medical appointments, religious services, disciplinary hearings, and other events.
  • Properly train staff on how to work respectfull and appropriately with deaf people detained at the facility. 
  • Provide any other aids or services a deaf person might require to have an equivalent experience as a hearing person at the facility.
  • Appropriate compensation for Mr. Jones for the discrimination he experienced while detained at the facility

Date filed

Thursday, January 11, 2024

Court

US District Court, District of Nevada

Case number

2:24-cv-00090
Attorney(s):
Christopher Peterson Esq., Jacob Smith Esq.

Hide banner image

Date

Friday, January 12, 2024 - 9:00am

Show featured image

Featured image

Deaf prisoners have rights

Related issues

Smart Justice

Documents

Show related content

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Status

Menu parent dynamic listing

19

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

Standard with sidebar

Show list numbers

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Filed