Vol. 30 No. 20 Law Enforcement Training Is More Important Than Ever
The claim of negligent training is one of the most common claims against law enforcement, especially in federal civil rights lawsuits. In order to defend against such claims it is necessary to prove that appropriate training in the relevant areas had been provided. Civil rights litigation is based on 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which states, […]
Vol. 30 No. 13 Stress Caused by a Supervisor’s Oversight is not a Disability
On May 26, 2015 the Third District Court of Appeals held, in Higgins-Williams v. Sutter Medical Foundation, that “an inability to work under a particular supervisor because of anxiety and stress related to the supervisor’s standard oversight of job performance is not a disability recognized in California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA; Gov. Code, […]
Vol. 30 No. 12 U.S. Supreme Court Holds that a Convicted Felon May Transfer Firearms Owned by the Felon to a Third Party Under Certain Circumstances
On May 18, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, unanimously, in the case of Henderson v. United States, that 18 U.S.C. section 922(g), which prohibits a felon from possessing a firearm, did not bar the transfer of firearms owned by the felon to a third party, unless the transfer would permit the felon to later […]
Vol. 30 No. 11 U.S. Supreme Court “Ducks” ADA Issue Involving Police and Violent Mentally Ill Persons
On May 18, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6 – 2 in City and County of San Francisco v. Sheehan, that police officers who forcibly entered the room of a woman with a mental disability and shot her are entitled to qualified immunity from a lawsuit seeking redress for the woman’s injuries, because there […]
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 […]