Calvin Ray Marruquin v. Henderson County Detention Center et al.

Marruquin · United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, Owensboro Division · December 4, 2025 · No. 4:25-CV-P15-JHM

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky partially grants and partially denies Defendant Justin Whitaker’s motion for summary judgment in a prisoner civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court holds that the pat-down, body scan, and visual strip search of Plaintiff Calvin Ray Marruquin were reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, but finds a genuine dispute of material fact concerning Whitaker’s alleged manual removal of a drug baggie from Marruquin’s rectum. The court permits Whitaker to file a renewed summary-judgment motion addressing that claim and qualified immunity.

Holdings

  1. The search did not violate the Fourth Amendment. A pat-down, body scan, and strip-search or visual body-cavity search of a person arrested on felony drug charges were reasonable in scope, manner, and justification when conducted pursuant to the detention center's policy and in a private room.
  2. Summary judgment was denied on Plaintiff's claim that Whitaker manually removed the baggie from Plaintiff's rectum without a warrant or medical assistance because the verified complaint and Whitaker's affidavit presented a genuine dispute of material fact regarding who removed the baggie and how the removal occurred.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the pat-down, electronic body scan, and strip-search or visual body-cavity search of a detainee arrested on felony drug charges violated the Fourth Amendment.
  2. Whether summary judgment was appropriate on Plaintiff's claim that Defendant Whitaker manually removed a baggie from Plaintiff's rectum without a warrant or medical assistance.
  3. Whether the court should permit a renewed motion for summary judgment addressing the merits and qualified-immunity defense on the manual-removal claim.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (15)

  • Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323-24 (1986)(followed)
  • Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248-49, 255 (1986)(followed)
  • Laster v. City of Kalamazoo, 746 F.3d 714, 726 (6th Cir. 2014)(followed)
  • Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986)(followed)
  • Johnson v. Stewart, No. 08-1521, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 27051, at *6-7 (6th Cir. May 5, 2010)(followed)
  • Viergutz v. Lucent Techs., Inc., 375 F. App'x 482, 485 (6th Cir. 2010)(followed)
  • Weberg v. Franks, 229 F.3d 514, 526 n.13 (6th Cir. 2000)(followed)
  • Williams v. Browman, 981 F.2d 901, 905 (6th Cir. 1992)(followed)
  • Stoudemire v. Mich. Dep't of Corr., 705 F.3d 560, 575 (6th Cir. 2013)(followed)
  • Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 559 (1979)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 15.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…