Vol. 30 No. 10 ALPR Data Exempt from CPRA Disclosure
ALPR DATA EXEMPT FROM CPRA DISCLOSURE On May 6, 2015, the Second District Court of Appeal ruled, unanimously, in ACLU et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (County of Los Angeles, et al.) that “the California Public Records Act (CPRA) exemption for law enforcement records of investigations [Gov. Code, § 6254, subd. (f)] […]
Vol. 30 No. 9 U.S. Supreme Court Limits Detaining Person In Routine Traffic Stop
U.S. SUPREME COURT LIMITS DETAINING PERSON IN ROUTINE TRAFFIC STOP On April 21, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in Rodriguez v. United States, that “(a)bsent reasonable suspicion, police extension of a traffic stop in order to conduct a dog sniff violates the Constitution’s shield against unreasonable seizures.” The Court found that “(b)eyond determining whether to […]
Vol. 30 No. 14 Public Resources and Elections: Used to Educate or Advocate?
Can public funds or resources be used to distribute material which is political in nature in an effort to urge the public to support or oppose an initiative on the ballot? The case law and statutory law governing these issues is clear on when and how a local agency or official can use public funds […]
Vol. 30 No. 15 U.S. Supreme Court Rules That a Warrant is Needed to View Hotel Guest Registers
On June 22, 2015, the United States Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, in the case of City of Los Angeles v. Patel, held that “the provision of the Los Angeles Municipal Code that requires hotel operators to make their registries available to the police on demand is facially unconstitutional because it penalizes them for […]
Vol. 30 No. 19- ICE Detainers Put Sheriffs’ in Untenable Position
On several days during July, 2015, the Los Angeles Times and other media outlets have published news stories regarding crimes committed by persons who had been identified as individuals who were in the country illegally. In addition, it was noted that in the tragic murder of a young woman in San Francisco, the accused killer […]
Vol. 30 No.18 County Jail Facilities May Be Required To Provide Attorney Contact Visits With Inmates
COUNTY JAIL FACILITIES MAY BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ATTORNEY CONTACT VISITS WITH INMATES On July 8, 2015, the California Supreme Court denied review of the Third District Court of Appeal decision entitled County of Nevada v. Superior Court (Siegfried), 236 Cal.App.4th 1001. The Court of Appeal held that the superior court did not abuse its discretion […]
Vol. 30 No. 17 The District Attorney Must Serve A Pitchess Motion Before Accessing A Peace Officer’s Personnel File
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY MUST SERVE A PITCHESS MOTION BEFORE ACCESSING A PEACE OFFICER’S PERSONNEL FILE On July 6, 2015, the California Supreme Court unanimously overturned the case of People v. Superior Court (Johnson). The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal decision, issued last fall, which held that when a peace officer was a material witness in […]
Vol. 30 No. 16 Objective Reasonableness Is The Standard Of Review For Uses Of Force On Pretrial Detainees
OBJECTIVE REASONABLENESS IS THE STANDARD OF REVIEW FOR USES OF FORCE ON PRETRIAL DETAINEES In a June 22, 2015, decision, the United States Supreme Court acted inKingsley v. Hendrickson, holding that uses of force on pretrial detainees will be evaluated on the standard of objective reasonableness, and not on the subjective knowledge or intent of an […]
Vol. 33 No. 6 GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 20480: LIMITATIONS ON CALPERS EMPLOYEES WORKING OUT OF CLASSIFICATION
Effective January 1, 2018, CalPERS contracting agencies and school employers are required to restrict “out of class appointments” to 960 hours in a fiscal year. Gov. Code § 20480. Government Code section 20480(f) defines “out of class appointment” as “an appointment of an employee to an upgraded position or higher classification by the employer or […]
Vol. 35 No. 32 GENUINE ISSUE OF FACT EXISTED AS TO WHETHER DEFENDANT USED EXCESSIVE FORCE IN BRIEFLY KNEELING ON PLAINTIFF’S BACK
In a case filed on October 27, 2020, in Cortesluna v. Luna,[1] the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment to an officer who the plaintiff claimed used excessive force. In reaching its conclusion, the Court determined that the officer was not entitled to qualified immunity for briefly placing […]