Does the state have to show conscience-shocking behavior on the part of the state when it takes into custody an individual who has not been treated for medical reasons?

¹¹ We have applied a separate "shocks the conscience" analysis in cases that do not involve the medical needs of those the state has taken into custody. See , e.g. , Matican , 524 F.3d at 155 (requiring plaintiff to show conscience-shocking behavior on the part of the state where plaintiff confidential informant was harmed while on the streets, not in a prison or jail); Lombardi v. Whitman , 485 F.3d 73 (2d Cir. 2007) (requiring proof of conscience-shocking behavior when plaintiffs alleged government made false assurances that workplace would be safe, although plaintiffs were not in custody).