Vol. 37 No. 6 ARREST INFORMATION WAS NOT SUBJECT TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE BECAUSE THE DISCLOSURE MANDATE IN THE GOVERNMENT CODE REGARDING ARRESTS EXTENDED ONLY TO INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CONTEMPORANEOUS POLICE ACTIVITY
In Kinney v. Superior Court, 2022 Cal. App. LEXIS 293 (5th Dist. Apr. 7, 2022), the Court of Appeal determined that arrestee name information was not subject to public disclosure under Government Code section 6254(f)(1), because the disclosure mandate regarding arrests extended only to information pertaining to contemporaneous police activity and the information sought, which […]
Vol. 37 No. 7 PLAINTIFF’S SHOWING THAT THE PROSECUTION ENDED WITHOUT A CONVICTION IS ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THE FAVORABLE TERMINATION ELEMENT OF A 42 U.S.C. SECTION 1983 FOURTH AMENDMENT MALICIOUS PROSECUTION CLAIM
In Thompson v. Clark, 212 L. Ed. 2d 382 (2022), the United States Supreme Court held that to demonstrate a favorable termination of a criminal prosecution for purposes of the Fourth Amendment claim under Section 1983 for malicious prosecution, a plaintiff need not show that the criminal prosecution ended with some affirmative indication of innocence. […]
Vol. 37 No. 8 CALIFORNIA LAW BANNING SALES OF SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES TO YOUNG ADULTS VIOLATED THE SECOND AMENDMENT
In Jones v. Bonta, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 12657 (9th Cir. May 11, 2022), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determined the California law prohibiting the sale of semiautomatic rifles to young adults was unconstitutional. In reaching its conclusion, the Court found that the laws burdened the right to home self-defense and did not reasonably […]
Vol 37. No. 9 SUPREME COURT EXPANDS SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS, STRIKING DOWN NEW YORK’S “PROPER CAUSE” REQUIREMENT FOR ISSUANCE OF A CCW
In a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court in, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al., v. Bruen,[1] determined that the State of New York’s requirement that applicants for concealed carry weapons permits must establish “proper cause” for issuance of the permit was unconstitutional under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments because […]
Vol 37. No. 10 A VIOLATION OF MIRANDA RULES DOES NOT PROVIDE A BASIS FOR A 42 U.S.C. SECTION 1983 CLAIM
In a 6-3 decision in Vega v. Tekoh,[1] the United States Supreme Court reversed and remanded a Circuit Court decision holding that the use of an un-Mirandized statement against a defendant in a criminal proceeding violates the Fifth Amendment and may support a Section 1983 claim against the officer who obtained the statement. The Supreme […]
Vol. 38 No. 4 PLAINTIFF’S EXCESSIVE FORCE AND FALSE ARREST CLAIMS WERE NOT BARRED BY THE HECK DOCTRINE BECAUSE HIS NO CONTEST PLEA WAS NOT ENTERED AS AN ACTUAL CONVICTION
In Duarte v. City of Stockton,[1] the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that that Heck v. Humphrey bar did not apply when criminal charges were dismissed after entry of a plea that was held in abeyance pending the defendant’s compliance with certain conditions. Background In May 2015, Francisco Duarte was in a public area […]
Vol. 38 No. 14 NEW LAW AFFECTING CALIFORNIA EMPLOYEES WHO USE MARIJUANA OFF-DUTY RAISES QUESTIONS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), protects and safeguards the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain, and hold employment without discrimination, abridgment, or harassment on account of race, religion, gender, physical or mental disability amongst other protected statuses. On September 18, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill […]
Vol. 38 No. 15 DISTRICT COURT ENTERS INJUNCTION CONCERNING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SB 2 CONCERNING “SENSITIVE PLACES”
On December 20, 2023, United States District Judge Cormac J. Carney of the Central District Court’s Southern Division issued an order granting a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of certain challenged provisions of Senate Bill 2 against any individuals with permits to carry a concealed weapon. The Court found the challenged provisions unconstitutional pursuant to N.Y. […]
Vol. 39 No. 1 RETIRED PEACE OFFICERS AND THE IMPACT OF SENATE BILL 2 (2023-2024)
The passage of SB-2 (2023-2024) has raised a number of questions about the security of retired peace officers and the continued ability to carry a concealed firearm. The purpose of this Client Alert is to explain the limits of SB-2 and affirm the authority of retired peace officers to carry a concealed firearm. Among the […]
Vol. 39 No. 2 TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED RESTRAINING CALIFORNIA DOJ FROM ENFORCING REGULATION MANDATING “GENDER OF OFFICER” REPORTING PENDING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HEARING
Background The California Police Chiefs Association (“CPCA”), California State Sheriffs’ Association (“CSSA”), Peace Officers Research Association of California (“PORAC”), California Association of Highway Patrolmen (“CAHP”), Brian Marvel, and Jake Johnson recently filed an action against the California Attorney General and the Department of Justice seeking declaratory relief and injunctive relief preventing the DOJ from enforcing […]