Vol. 30 No. 1 IF A SHERIFF IS ENTITLED TO INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, PURSUANT TO GOV. CODE 31000.6, COURT CANNOT LIMIT THE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION
IF A SHERIFF IS ENTITLED TO INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, PURSUANT TO GOV. CODE 31000.6, COURT CANNOT LIMIT THE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION. On January 6, 2015, the California Court of Appeal ordered that good cause existed to publish the case of Rivero v. Lake County Board of Supervisors. The case involved a dispute between the Lake County […]
CSSA Magazine- January 2015 WORKPLACE INVESTIGATIONS REGARDING ALLEGED MISCONDUCT – PITFALLS TO AVOID
WORKPLACE INVESTIGATIONS REGARDING ALLEGED MISCONDUCT – PITFALLS TO AVOID By: Martin J. Mayer, General Counsel- California State Sheriffs’ Association Investigations of alleged misconduct by employees are inevitable, in virtually all employment environments, but most particularly in law enforcement agencies. Since, in California, the state law requires that a process exist to enable the public to file complaints against […]
Vol. 29 No. 29 COURT OF APPEAL RULES THAT LAPD POLICY ON IMPOUNDING VEHICLES IS LEGAL
COURT OF APPEAL RULES THAT LAPD POLICY ON IMPOUNDING VEHICLES IS LEGAL On December 26, 2014, the California Second District Court of Appeal held, in LAPPL v. City of Los Angeles, et al, that the LAPD “Special Order 7,” regarding when officers could impound vehicles driven by unlicensed drivers, was lawful. Harold Sturgeon, a Los Angeles […]
Vol. 29 No. 28 USE OF “PITCHESS” MOTIONS IN ADMINISTRATIVE DISCIPLINARY APPEALS IS PERMITTED
USE OF “PITCHESS” MOTIONS IN ADMINISTRATIVE DISCIPLINARY APPEALS IS PERMITTED On December 1, 2014, the California Supreme Court decided the case of Riverside County Sheriff’s Department v. Stiglitz (Drinkwater) (E052807). California law enforcement has been anticipating this decision for the past year. The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal decision permitting a “Pitchess” motion to […]
Vol. 29 No. 27 – TAKING DNA FROM ARRESTEES: A CONFLICT BETWEEN STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS
TAKING DNA FROM ARRESTEES: A CONFLICT BETWEEN STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS On December 3, 2014, the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, unanimously held, in People v. Buza, that California’s law, enacted pursuant to Proposition 69, which allows taking DNA samples from all who are arrested for felonies, is unconstitutional. That decision is in conflict […]
FIRM RECENT NEWS
Recent News: – Martin Mayer presented a legal update at the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) annual conference in Orlando, Florida to the Police Psychologist Section. – Martin Mayer, Jim Touchstone and Denise Rocawich were successful in opposing a writ petition brought by the Stanislaus County Deputy Sheriffs’ Association against Sheriff Adam Christianson […]
Vol. 29 No. 26 PERUTA v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO: ALL APPLICATIONS TO INTERVENE ARE DENIED
The three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which decided the Peruta case, has, finally after more than nine months, ruled on the applications from the State, the Brady Center, and CPCA and CPOA to intervene in the action, and denied all the motions. The denial of the motions by the […]
Vol. 29 No. 25 RECENT COURT DECISIONS AFFECTING POLICE PSYCHOLOGISTS
RECENT COURT DECISIONS AFFECTING POLICE PSYCHOLOGISTS [The following court decisions were presented by Martin Mayer at the 2014 International Association of Chiefs’ of Police Annual Conference to the Police Psychologists’ Section of IACP. They include appellate court cases from states other than California but are all relevant to the issues of Fitness for Duty Evaluations.] 1. […]
Vol. 29 No. 18 Public Employees Subpoened Testimony Alleging Illegal Activity at His Agency is Protected Under 1st Amendment
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE’S SUBPOENED TESTIMONY, ALLEGING ILLEGAL ACTIVITY AT HIS AGENCY, IS PROTECTED UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT On June 19, 2014, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled, inLane v. Franks, that a state employee’s sworn testimony concerning alleged illegal activity within the agency at which he worked, constituted First Amendment protected speech. Previous court rulings […]
JONES & MAYER Successful in Rivero v. Lake County Board of Supervisors
JONES & MAYER Successful in Rivero v. Lake County Board of Supervisors The California Court of Appeal unanimously ruled in favor of a Sheriff’s right to independent counsel pursuant to Gov. Code Section 31000.6, for the duration of the underlying issue being contested, when a conflict prevents the county counsel from serving as the Sheriff’s […]