When Jose Cervantes Conejo was admitted to the hospital in March of last year with signs of head trauma, a sheriff’s deputy told medical staff that he had rolled off a bench at the Vista jail and hit his head. But tests showed the injuries were "not compatible with a simple fall," a doctor at Palomar Medical Center noted in Cervantes Conejo’s chart — a skull fracture, broken eye socket and multiple brain hemorrhages. The 43-year-old fell into a coma and died two weeks later. Now his wife, Maritza Benitez, has filed a federal lawsuit alleging that her husband, who struggled with alcoholism, should have been taken to a medical facility by the Escondido police officer who arrested him and monitored for withdrawal. He at least should have been placed in one of the jail’s sobering cells, where he could have been checked on every 30 minutes, the legal complaint says. The Escondido Police Department did not immediately respond to The San Diego Union-Tribune’s questions about the lawsuit, although public agencies generally do not comment on pending litigation. A Sheriff’s Office spokesperson declined to comment on the lawsuit but said the department’s policy and procedures "undergo regular reviews and are revised to meet legal requirements and best practices." Cervantes Conejo was one of nine people who died last year either in a San Diego County jail or after being transported from jail to a hospital. He was arrested March 28, 2024, for being drunk in public, a misdemeanor under state law. A provision of that law gives the arresting officer the option to take a person to a medical facility or detox center for treatment and evaluation. "Rather than take Conejo to a facility for a 72-hour treatment and evaluation. … Defendants transported Conejo to, and booked him into, Vista Detention Facility," says the complaint, filed May 5. Because untreated alcohol withdrawal can be fatal, Cervantes Conejo was assessed during the booking process to determine if he should be placed on the jail’s withdrawal protocol, which involves medication and monitoring. He was initially screened by a nurse who noted that he was "disoriented, having hand and body tremors at rest, slurred speech, poor balance, nausea and vomiting," the complaint says. But the nurse selected "none of the above" on an assessment that asked specifically about these symptoms, it adds.

A physician’s assistant who conducted a subsequent screening flagged Cervantes Conejo as being at risk for alcohol withdrawal and ordered that he be given diazepam, a drug commonly used to ease symptoms of withdrawal, along with the anti-seizure medication Keppra. Cervantes Conejo was not provided with either drug, the complaint says. Instead, he was placed in a holding cell where, hours later, he was found on the floor with a bloody nose and his right eye swollen shut. He was transported to Palomar Medical Center. There, the complaint says, a deputy told medical staff that Cervantes Conejo had fallen off a bench. But a neurosurgeon who evaluated Cervantes Conejo disagreed. "Jeffrey Tomlin, M.D. at Palomar Medical Center opined that Conejo had a skull fracture out of proportion to the described incident and mechanism of trauma," the lawsuit says. The complaint faults the County of San Diego for "a long-standing unconstitutional policy, custom, and/or practice which allowed its deputies and medical staff to delay and/or deny medical care to inmates." It goes on to cite several prior lawsuits as examples — all of which resulted in multimillion-dollar settlements. Sheriff’s Office medical policies , which were last updated in 2022, spell out a specific plan for assessing people with a history of alcohol abuse and making sure they are treated for withdrawal. The protocol is based on recommendations from the National Commission of Correctional Health Care, which sets standards for medical care in jails and prisons. The complaint argues that these guidelines weren’t followed. "Plaintiffs are informed and believe… that Conejo’s condition while housed at (Vista Detention Facility) triggered application of the NCCHC Standards but that Defendants did not follow those standards."