Vol. 18 No. 13- Civil Code Section 47.5 Is Alive
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer CIVIL CODE SECTION 47.5 IS ALIVE July 9, 2003 Two years ago, the California Court of Appeal held that Civil Code section 47.5(b) was unconstitutional; it allowed peace officers to sue a person civilly if that individual filed a complaint against the officer with his […]
Vol. 18 No. 12- Inyo County V. Paiute Shoshone Indians – 2003 Dar 5282
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer & Paul R. Coble INYO COUNTY V. PAIUTE SHOSHONE INDIANS – 2003 DAR 5282 May 28, 2003 Paul R. Coble and Martin J. Mayer of the Law Offices of Jones & Mayer were pleased to provideamicus curiae briefing on behalf of the California State Sheriffs […]
Vol. 18 No. 11- Peer Support Counselor Privilege
To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer & Dean J. Pucci AB 960 “PEER SUPPORT COUNSELOR PRIVILEGE” May 21, 2003 As a response to client concerns regarding proposed legislation, AB 960, we offer the following analysis of the impact of such legislation. AB 960, in short, will provide designated “peer supporters” (not […]
Vol. 18 No. 9- Teter V. City Of Newport Beach
CLIENT ALERT MEMORANDUM April 29, 2003 To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer & Dean J. Pucci TETER V. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH On April 28, 2003 the California Supreme Court decided a city can claim immunity for jail injuries sustained by an arrestee who was released without charges. Martin J. […]
Vol. 18 No. 8- Senate Bill 402: Binding Arbitration
CLIENT ALERT MEMORANDUM April 24, 2003 To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer & Dean J. Pucci SENATE BILL 402: BINDING ARBITRATION The California Supreme Court in County of Riverside v. Superior Court of Riverside County (Riverside Sheriff’s Association), ruled, on April 21, 2003 that the Legislature’s attempt, via SB 402, […]
Vol. 18 No. 7- Parolee Searches And The 4th Amendment : A Follow-Up On The 9th Circuit’s Decision
CLIENT ALERT MEMORANDUM March 25, 2003 To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer & Dean J. Pucci PAROLEE SEARCHES AND THE 4TH AMENDMENT : A FOLLOW-UP ON THE 9THCIRCUIT’S DECISION Following the release of our Client Alert Memo regarding the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision inU.S. v. Crawford, we received a number […]
Vol. 18 No. 6- Parolee Searches And The 4th Amendment
CLIENT ALERT MEMORANDUM March 24, 2003To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer & Dean J. Pucci PAROLEE SEARCHES AND THE 4TH AMENDMENT The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, on March 5, 2003, clarified the law governing parole and probation searches. The Court concluded that a parolee’s expectation […]
Vol. 16 No. 11- People V. Mooc
CLIENT ALERT MEMORANDUM December 28, 2001 To: All Police Chiefs and Sheriffs From: Martin J. Mayer PEOPLE v. MOOC The California Supreme Court gave a well deserved, and most appropriate, Christmas present to peace officers throughout the State of California, on December 24, 2001. The Court overruled a Court of Appeal decision in the […]
Vol. 24 No. 1.- Police Negligence Does Not Always Trigger The Exclusonary Rule
POLICE NEGLIGENCE DOES NOT ALWAYS TRIGGER THE EXCLUSONARY RULE The United States Supreme Court has ruled, in a 5-4 decision, that “if an officer reasonably believes there is an outstanding arrest warrant, but that belief turns out to be wrong because of a negligent bookkeeping error by another police employee,” then the “contraband found during […]
Vol. 28 No. 7 – Federal Court Uphold’s Maryland’s “Good Cause” Requirement For CCW Permit
FEDERAL COURT UPHOLDS MARYLAND’S “GOOD CAUSE” REQUIREMENT FOR CCW PERMIT On March 21, 2013, the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, in the case of Woolard; Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., v. Gallagher; et al., held that “section 5–306(a)(5)(ii) of the Public Safety Article of the Maryland Code, to the extent that it conditions eligibility for a […]