Vol. 19 No. 4- Venegas V. Los Angeles County
VENEGAS V. LOS ANGELES COUNTY 32 Cal. 4th 820 (2004) May 13, 2004 California Supreme Court holds that state sheriffs cannot be sued for federal civil rights violation in state courts. Plaintiffs, husband and wife, filed suit in state court against defendants County of Los Angeles alleging causes of action under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiffs […]
Vol. 19 No. 3- Pursuit Legislation
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer PURSUIT LEGISLATION April 15, 2004 If proposed legislation S.B.1866 is passed, it will, virtually, prevent peace officers from pursing individuals who have committed crimes and are fleeing from police. Although it’s stated intent is to reduce potential harm to the public it will, in fact, […]
Vol. 19 No. 2- Ninth Circuit Approves County Jail Strip Search Policy
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer BROOKS ET AL VS. VENTURA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS February 20, 2004 On February 18, 2004, Ventura County Superior Court Judge Henry J. Walsh ruled that a lawsuit by the Sheriff and District Attorney, against the Board of Supervisors, will proceed to trial and rejected the […]
Vol. 19 No. 1- Roe V. City Of San Diego Police Department Et Al.
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer ROE V. CITY OF SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT ET AL. February 6, 2004 Ninth Circuit Holds that Police Officer’s Right to Publicly Sell Video Tapes of Himself Masturbating is Deserving of some First Amendment Protections. Roe, a San Diego Police Officer, was discovered selling pornographic […]
Vol. 18 No. 22- Darvish V. City Of Inglewood
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer DARVISH V. CITY OF INGLEWOOD December 30, 2003 The California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, ruled on December 29. 2003, in Darvish v. City of Inglewood, that the City violated no provisions of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (POBOR) in […]
Vol. 18 No. 21- Representation Of Personnel Boards
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer REPRESENTATION OF PERSONNEL BOARDS December 26, 2003 An assistant city attorney who has, frequently, provided legal advice and guidance to a personnel board, civil service commission, etc., in the past, cannot serve as an advocate for a party (e.g. police department) in an adversarial proceeding […]
Vol. 18 No. 20- Upland Poa V. City Of Upland
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer UPLAND POA v. CITY OF UPLAND December 18, 2003 California Supreme Court Affirms: A Peace Officer’s Right to a Representative of His/Her Choice Under Cal. Gov’t Code § 3303(i) Must be Reasonable We are most pleased to inform you that, on December 18, 2003, the […]
Vol. 18 No. 19- IA Investigations: One-Year Statute Of Limitations
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer IA INVESTIGATIONS: ONE-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS November 24, 2003 Approximately six years ago, the Peace Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (G.C. § 3300-3312) was amended to create a one-year statute of limitations for the completion of an investigation and notification to an employee of […]
Vol. 18 No. 18- Parolee Searches
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer PAROLEE SEARCHES November 17, 2003 As you will recall, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, in U.S. v. Crawford, 343 Fed 3d 961 (2003), held that law enforcement could not search a parolee without “reasonable suspicion” to believe a crime was occurring, or had […]
Vol. 19 No. 5- Parolee Searches: Status Report
PAROLEE SEARCHES: June 1, 2004 STATUS REPORT Last year, the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeal held, in the case of United States v. Crawford, 343 F. 3d 961 (2003), that law enforcement could not search a parolee (or a probationer) without “reasonable suspicion” to believe that a crime was occurring, or had occurred, involving […]