A simple scenario played every day in California. The need, the name (s) of the police, a call was received a. For whatever reason they want to know a citizen who went to call, email contacts and simply the question of what officers went to a specific call. The dispatcher refused the request, as well as the supervisory authority of the police. Consequently, failing to receive a subpoena, the possibility of appointing an official without the submission of a complaint by a public records are obtainedRequest.
The California Public Records Act ("Act"). The law requires that state and local agencies make their records available for public inspection. (Govt. Code § 6253rd), a "Public Record" is defined as "any writing prepared with information on the management of public affairs, possession, use or retained by any state or local agency [.]" (Govt. Code § 6252, SubD. (e).) definition is broad, "" every imaginable type of record that is involved in the coverthe process of the State [.] "(San Gabriel Tribune v. Supreme Court (1983) 143 Cal.App.3d 762, 774, cited in § 6252, SubD. (e).)
The public has a vital interest for the understanding and evaluation of the police department deals with the response of an alleged crime and the manner in which the call. The public has a right to the name and rank of officers, who responded and have played all the roles, to know in order to assess the department to respond if the Department's compliance with its ownThe policies and procedures to determine whether the department adapted response on best practices and propose changes to policies and procedures to respond to future similar incidents. The audience was also considerable interest in the review, the officials will be used to respond to a possible crime, and suggested how such training could be improved.
Name and rank of officers are not automatically exempt from disclosure. Commission on Peace and Training requirements seeSuperior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 278th "Law enforcement officers carry on their shoulders the cloak of authority to enforce state laws. To maintain confidence in their police forces, the public must be fully informed of the activities of its peace officers. " Id at 297th
The Attorney General has recently decided that "the name of a peace officer involved in a critical incident is not categorically against disclosure" under the CPRA and the Penal Code. No Opinion 07-208, 91Ops. Cal. Atty. January 11, "Being involved in a request for the names of the officers in a particular incident, without the Commission's investigation or disciplinary matters that may have arisen the incident will be provided." The Attorney General pointed out, ibid. The 'identity of officials in a specific incident that occurred in the course and scope of their official duties involved with clear information of peace "for the conduct of public affairs and subject toIf disclosure is recorded in any way and can be drafted to protect confidential material. "Ibid.
The officers of the identity can be denied only if the government can try to bear their heavy burden "the public interest in disclosure outweighs the record does not clearly serve the public interest in disclosure of records." Ibid. (Quote Govt. Code, § 6255 (a).) For example, this narrow exception applies to an undercover agent or an accident with a street gang mayand the prospect of retaliation by the gang. Ibid. However, rather than the exception for any distinction between cases where an officer is involved.
The request is a request for personnel files. The definition of "personal files" in the Penal Code § 832.7 is provided in Section 832.8 and Section 832.8, not specifically refer to the records of the training of officers. Records that "does not reflect any of the items listed in section 832.8 are not exempt from disclosure§ 832.7. International Federation of engineers and technicians, Local 21, AFL-CIO v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 319, 346
If the police ask determines that some or all of the information or to qualify for exemption from disclosure, then, if, as is often the case under the law, the discretionary exemption, and if so, whether it is necessary in this case to decline the exercise of the discretion of the information services'.
In addition, if the policenotes that some but not all the information from disclosure and that the police intended to detain her, demanding that the police had initially unrecognizable and the rest are available as desired. In any case, the police ask you please provide a signed declaration, citing the court, that if you want some or all of the information is exempt and not to disclose certain holidays. If requests for public records typically from the city attorney for the municipal police or treatedConsultant to the sheriff of the county.
In addition, the agency has 10 days to decide if copies available. In "unusual" cases (pending request is "voluminous," seeks the records off site, or request consultation with other bodies), the Agency may give written notice to the applicant by another 14 days to respond. (Govt. Code § 6253 (c)) These time periods can be used not only to delay access to records. (Govt. Code § 6253 (d)) as such, may delay the police response to theirsince these data must be easily accessible, as this is the way in which a member of the public be aware of how to remain in compliance with the law. If elements are not required to ask the police to give so please, if you reply.
Sure, it's best to consult an adviser about the request, and if done alone, always polite and respectful of the police. Because strict time lines for the police or public authority, in accordance with the request SCAR, iswise, the request by registered mail, FedEx, UPS, etc. and all communications shall be sent in writing.
0 comments:
Post a Comment