Vol. 30 No. 7 CCW Case To Be Reheard By “En Banc” Panel
CCW CASE TO BE REHEARD BY “EN BANC” PANEL On March 26, 2015, the full Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeal voted to have an “en banc” rehearing (11 justices of the Court) of the case of Peruta v. County of San Diego. Previously, a three judge panel split 2 – 1 and held that […]
Vol. 30 No. 6 Must Law Enforcement “Reasonably Accommodate” Violent, Mentally Ill, Suspects When Taking Them Into Custody?
MUST LAW ENFORCEMENT “REASONABLY ACCOMMODATE” VIOLENT, MENTALLY ILL, SUSPECTS WHEN TAKING THEM INTO CUSTODY? On March 23, 2015, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case ofSan Francisco v. Sheehan, involving the interaction between police and a mentally ill person. The issue presented focused on whether or not law enforcement, when confronting […]
Gregory Palmer presents a Pitchess motion training class at Anaheim, CA, Police Deptartment
Martin J. Mayer Presenting Chief Probation Officer’s of California – Current Legal Issues Regarding POBR, Sacramento, CA
Vol. 30 No. 5 CAL SUPREME COURT RULES “JESSICA’S LAW” UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS APPLIED IN SAN DIEGO
CAL SUPREME COURT RULES “JESSICA’S LAW” UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS APPLIED IN SAN DIEGO On March 2, 2015, the California Supreme Court unanimously found that the application of “Jessica’s Law” in San Diego County violated the constitutional rights of convicted sex offenders. The Court held that “the mandatory residency restrictions [are] unconstitutional as applied to all registered sex […]
January 20, 2015, Martin J. Mayer Presenting to Upland Police Dept. Internal Affairs/POBR, Upland, California
Vol. 30 No. 2 – FEDS IMPLEMENT MAJOR CHANGE TO ASSET FORFEITURE RULES
FEDS IMPLEMENT MAJOR CHANGE TO ASSET FORFEITURE RULES On January 16, 2015, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that “effective immediately, the Justice Department is taking an important step to prohibit federal agency adoptions of state and local seizures, except for public safety reasons. . . .” The Justice Department’s civil asset forfeiture program, called Equitable Sharing, […]
Vol. 29 No. 23 RIGHTEOUS FITNESS FOR DUTY EVALUATION VIOLATES NO EMPLOYEE RIGHTS
RIGHTEOUS FITNESS FOR DUTY EVALUATION VIOLATES NO EMPLOYEE RIGHTS On September 3, 2014, the First District CA Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed the right of an employer to order an employee to cooperate in a fitness for duty evaluation (FFDE) when circumstances call for it. [The court refers to a “FFD” rather than a FFDE.] In […]
August 2014 CPOA Magazine- “OFF THE CLOCK” ACTIVITY BY EMPLOYEES – IS IT AUTHORIZED?
“OFF THE CLOCK” ACTIVITY BY EMPLOYEES – IS IT AUTHORIZED? By: Martin J. Mayer, General Counsel- California Peace Officers’ Association Recently, there were two California Court of Appeals decisions which directly relate to whether or not an employee’s off duty activity is considered to be authorized and/or encouraged by the employer? In one case, Jong […]
VOL. 29 NO. 22 PROSECUTOR CAN REVIEW OFFICERS’ PERSONNEL FILES TO COMPLY WITH “BRADY” OBLIGATIONS
PROSECUTOR CAN REVIEW OFFICERS’ PERSONNEL FILES TO COMPLY WITH “BRADY” OBLIGATIONS On August 11, 2014, the California First District Court of Appeal held in The People v. The Superior Court of San Francisco (Johnson), that “(i)n fulfilling its federal constitutional duty to disclose exculpatory evidence to a criminal defendant under Brady v. Maryland, (1963) 373 U.S. […]