Vol. 22 No. 19- Medical costs of arrestees – who pays before booking?
MEDICAL COSTS OF ARRESTEES – WHO PAYS BEFORE BOOKING? On November 15, 2007 the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, issued a ruling which substantially changes what had been law, and practice, in California for many years. In the case of Sharp Healthcare, et al, v. County of San Diego, 2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1858, […]
Vol. 22 No. 20-POBR Does Not Apply To Criminal Investigations
POBR DOES NOT APPLY TO CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS Last year, a superior court judge ruled that if an employing agency was conducting a criminal investigation of an officer, it must afford the officer all rights under the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (POBRA), as it would during an internal, administrative, investigation. On December […]
Vol. 23 No. 8- Disabled And Segregated Inmates Entitled To Progams And Facilities
DISABLED AND SEGREGATED INMATES ENTITLED TO PROGAMS AND FACILITIES March 27, 2008 On March 24, 2008, the Ninth Circuit U. S. Court of Appeals ruled, in the case of Pierce v. County of Orange, that inmates housed in administrative segregation are entitled to “some minimal access to religious services and exercise.” The Court also ruled […]
Vol. 23 No. 7- TRAVEL TIME TO TRAINING – WHO PAYS?
TRAVEL TIME TO TRAINING – WHO PAYS? March 26, 2008 From time to time an employee may be required to attend off-site training. Who pays for the time spent traveling to the training site: the employer or the employee? The answer depends on whether federal or state law is applied. FEDERAL LAW AND CALIFORNIA LAW […]
Vol. 23 No. 6- Re: City of Garden Grove v. Superior Court (Kha)
Re: City of Garden Grove v. Superior Court (Kha) March 20, 2008 Unfortunately, but not unexpectedly, the California Supreme Court denied the City of Garden Grove’s petition for review of the cited case. The Court also denied the request to depublish the opinion of the Court of Appeal. Only one member of the Court, Justice […]
Vol. 23 No. 4- L. A. Times v. Post – change in procedure
L.A. TIMES v. POST – CHANGE IN PROCEDURE February 05, 2008 On February 4, 2008, we published a client alert memo based upon information contained in a memorandum issued by Paul Cappitelli, the Executive Director of POST. The POST memorandum directed agencies to notify POST “if an agency seeks to exclude names from the report, […]
Vol. 23 No. 3- L. A. Times v. Post – disclosure of officer’s names
L. A. TIMES v. POST – DISCLOSURE OF OFFICER’S NAMES February 04, 2008 The attached information from POST requires your immediate attention. In order to avoid the disclosure of the names of officers whose identity must be withheld in order to protect their safety, all law enforcement agencies must respond to POST within the next 10 […]
Vol. 23 No. 2- Smoking Medical Marijuana can cost you your Job
SMOKING MEDICAL MARIJUANA CAN COST YOU YOUR JOB January 28, 2008 The California Supreme Court ruled, on January 24, 2008, in the case of Ross v. Ragingwire Telecommunications, Inc., that it does not violate one’s right of privacy, nor is it discriminatory, to fire an employee who uses marijuana for medical reasons. Ross’ doctor recommended marijuana to […]
Vol. 23 No. 1- Coleman/Plata Update
COLEMAN/PLATA UPDATE January 4, 2008 In our last update on the prisoner release litigation [Coleman v. Schwarzenegger/ Plata v. Schwarzenegger], we informed you that we were preparing to file a joint Motion for Reconsideration/Motion for Clarification on behalf of all Intervenor-Defendants, excepting the County Intervenors (Sheriff, Police Chief, and Chief Probation and Corrections Intervenors; Republican […]
Vol. 22 No. 10- Issuing Honorary Badges
“ISSUING HONORARY BADGES” August 1, 2007 On July 30, 2007, the Office of the Attorney General issued an official opinion (No. 06-307) addressing three questions regarding the issuance of honorary badges. Although the questions posed focused on the actions of a sheriff, the analysis would be applicable to anyone authorized to issue a badge (for […]