A Miami-Dade corrections officer is under arrest and charged with the kidnapping and rape of a woman under his supervision. The man in custody, Yulian Gonzalez, is an 11-year veteran of the Department. He was last reported as being held without bail.

According to multiple news media sources, Gonzalez, 36, is charged with four counts of armed kidnapping and armed sexual battery. Apparently, the woman Gonzalez is alleged to have harmed was under house arrest at the time and was under the supervision of the corrections officer. According to the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office, Gonzalez threatened the woman that he would return her to custody if she refused to have sex with him.

The Department of Corrections released a statement in which the Department expressed sadness with the alleged conduct and stated its commitment to pursuing actions against employees who commit such offenses “to the fullest extent of the law.”

If convicted of these charges, Gonzalez could face up to life in prison. A lengthy prison sentence may make the victim and society at large feel safer, and the victim and the people of the City of Miami may even feel that justice has been done. But what about the personal harm the victim has suffered? Is she able to recover compensation for the damage done to her, including medical costs, pain and suffering, emotional distress, the loss of income if her employment was affected, and other legal damages?

Florida Victim Compensation Fund might not Apply

One resource may be Florida’s victim compensation fund, which provides compensation for medical treatment, wage loss and disability for certain injuries, including a physical injury during a crime or psychological damage from a “forcible felony.” However, there are strict procedures and timelines for applying to this fund. Notably, the fund is not available to crime victims who are “confined” or “in custody” in a municipal, county or state facility at the time. Would this victim’s house arrest status prevent her from accessing the fund? Also, the fund is in a state of crisis; it is bordering on insolvency, and Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody has recommended cuts to the fund.

Can the Assault Victim Recover Civil Damages against Gonzalez? Miami-Dade County?

Another possible source of compensation involves pursuing a civil assault claim against the corrections officer. Assault, battery and false imprisonment are all intentional torts (civil wrongs) that might apply here. If successful in a civil claim, an assault victim can recover money damages as compensation for medical bills, pain and suffering, and other harm she suffered. Punitive damages may also apply to cases like this one, which can greatly multiply the amount of compensation the victim can receive.

The fact that Gonzalez will be tried criminally could help in any civil case the victim may choose to file. The evidence used in the criminal case, including the fact of a conviction, if secured, could be powerful evidence in a civil case. However, it’s not required. Even if Gonzalez was not convicted or even tried, the victim might still have a solid civil case. The standard of proof required in a civil case (preponderance of the evidence) is considerably less than the standard needed to convict in a criminal prosecution (beyond a reasonable doubt). A criminal defendant also has constitutional protections surrounding issues such as the admission of evidence and self-incrimination. It’s easier for a plaintiff to win a civil judgment than it is for a prosecutor to win a conviction, even if the underlying facts are the same.

A separate issue is whether the victim would have a civil lawsuit against Miami-Dade County and the Department of Corrections. Typically, institutions have a duty to provide for the reasonable safety of persons in their care or custody. This duty applies to schools, hospitals, nursing homes, state prisons and county jails, for example. Where the person is not in custody, courts generally require some “special relationship” between a government employee and a victim in order to hold the government liable. It seems here that even if the victim is not considered to have been “in custody,” the courts would recognize a special relationship between the CO and the victim to hold the County liable for the acts of its employee. Even though the employee’s actions were intentional (not negligent), illegal and not condoned by the county, the CO was able to carry them out by his very status and position of power over the victim.