The manslaughter case was filed about 17 months after 4-year-old Curtis Washington was found unresponsive at his family’s apartment.
SOUTHFIELD, Mich. — For nearly a year and a half after 4-year-old Curtis Washington died, the criminal investigation remained largely outside public view. It surfaced in June when prosecutors charged his mother with involuntary manslaughter, alleging that failures in his medical care led to his death.
Latoya Washington, 37, was arraigned June 23 in 46th District Court. The Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office alleges that she failed to provide necessary care after Curtis suffered several seizures, received hospital treatment and was prescribed medicine intended to prevent further episodes. Authorities say she took him out of the hospital against medical advice, did not give him the prescribed treatment and did not obtain adequate care as his seizures continued.
The charge brought renewed attention to events that began on Jan. 23, 2025. Police said Curtis experienced multiple seizures that day and was taken to a hospital. Medical workers stabilized him and prescribed medication before Washington allegedly removed him from the facility after his condition appeared to improve. Investigators said doctors had advised that he should not yet be discharged. The hospital and treating medical professionals have not been identified publicly.
The next two days became the center of the later criminal case. Curtis allegedly suffered more seizures on Jan. 24 and Jan. 25. Police said the medicine prescribed to prevent those episodes was not administered. Reports based on the investigation also referred to rescue medication that allegedly was not provided during the child’s renewed seizures. Authorities have not publicly released the name of either medication, the written discharge instructions or records showing when the prescription became available.
On Jan. 25, officers and medical personnel were sent to the French Quarter Apartments on Basin Street after a report that a child was not breathing. They found Curtis unconscious and unresponsive. First responders attempted to help him and transported him to a hospital, where he was pronounced dead. That emergency response established the final point in the publicly released timeline, but it marked the beginning of a much longer investigative process.
Southfield detectives gathered information about the earlier hospitalization, the prescribed treatment and the child’s condition after he returned home. The department has not issued a detailed explanation of every step investigators took during the following 17 months. It is not known from the public record when detectives received complete hospital files, whether independent physicians reviewed the case or when prosecutors concluded that the available evidence supported a criminal charge.
Medical-death investigations can depend on records from several sources, including emergency responders, hospitals, pharmacies and forensic examiners. They may also require specialists to address whether different care probably would have changed the outcome. Officials have not said which of those materials were used here, and no complete police report, medical examiner’s report or charging affidavit was included in the public accounts reviewed for this article. The passage of time does not itself establish either the strength or weakness of a case. A delayed charge may follow an extended technical review, but it can also create questions about memories, document preservation and the availability of witnesses. In Washington’s case, prosecutors have publicly stated their conclusion that grossly negligent medical neglect caused Curtis’ death, but the supporting evidence has not yet been presented in an open trial.
That distinction is important because a criminal filing reflects an accusation, not a verdict. Washington is presumed innocent. To obtain a conviction, prosecutors would have to prove the required elements of involuntary manslaughter beyond a reasonable doubt. Public reporting has not established whether the defense will dispute the alleged conduct, the level of negligence, the medical cause of death or several of those points at once.
Washington was released after the arraignment on a $20,000 personal bond and was ordered to wear a GPS tether. Court records cited in initial reports did not list an attorney for her at the time. Without a public response from defense counsel, the early account of the case comes almost entirely from law enforcement and prosecution allegations. Washington’s own explanation for leaving the hospital and her account of what occurred at home have not been made public.
The phrase “against medical advice” is central to the police narrative, but the available reports provide limited detail about that event. They do not say whether Washington signed a formal discharge document, what risks doctors said they explained, whether hospital staff attempted to prevent the departure or whether follow-up care had been arranged. Those facts could become important as the court considers what Washington allegedly knew about the danger to Curtis.
The published accounts also do not state whether the boy had a prior seizure disorder or whether the episodes on Jan. 23 were his first known seizures. No information has been released about other diagnoses, possible causes of the seizures or any health problems that could have affected his treatment. The absence of those details limits conclusions about the medical evidence beyond the allegations announced by police. Southfield Police Chief Elvin Barren used the announcement of the charge to stress the dependence of young children on adult caregivers. “This case is a heartbreaking reminder that children, especially those with medical conditions, depend entirely on the adults responsible for their care,” he said. He added that adults must follow treatment plans and seek immediate care when a child’s condition deteriorates.
Barren’s statement framed the case as both a prosecution and a broader warning about unmet medical needs. The department asked family members, neighbors, educators, health workers and others to contact authorities when they believe a child is being neglected or denied necessary treatment. Police did not say that any of those groups had prior knowledge of Curtis’ condition or that an earlier report could have prevented his death.
The public account contains few details about Curtis beyond his name and age. Authorities have not disclosed information about his daily life, school or extended family, and no family statement was included in the reports reviewed. Limiting those details keeps the focus on the criminal allegation while also leaving the public with only a narrow picture of the child at the center of the case.
Most reports place the boy’s hospitalization on Jan. 23, 2025, the renewed seizures on Jan. 24 and 25, and his death on Jan. 25. At least one later secondary report listed the year as 2026, but that conflicts with the Southfield police chronology and with local reporting that described the death as occurring almost a year and a half before the June 2026 arraignment. The available evidence supports the 2025 dates. The charge carries a possible sentence of up to 15 years in prison under Michigan law if Washington is convicted. A possible maximum is not a prediction of the outcome or the sentence that would be imposed. Any punishment would depend on a conviction, the facts found by the court and Michigan sentencing rules. At this stage, the case remained in the district-court process used to determine whether a felony prosecution should advance.
Washington had been scheduled to appear before Judge Cynthia Arvant for a probable cause conference July 2. The reliable reports reviewed did not confirm the result of that proceeding, whether the parties requested more time or whether a preliminary examination occurred. The present court schedule and any later filings could not be independently established from the public material available for this report.
Central public facts remain limited: Curtis died two days after hospital treatment for seizures; his mother allegedly removed him against medical advice and failed to provide prescribed medicine; and prosecutors filed an involuntary manslaughter charge after a lengthy investigation. Whether the evidence proves criminal responsibility will be decided through the court process, not by the charging announcement.
Author note: Last updated July 23, 2026.