Law enforcement agencies may not be able to provide lists of officers with a history of misconduct to prosecutors.
If you are on trial for a crime in the state of California, one of the basic facts that you will likely want to know is if the police officer who is testifying against you has anything in his or her past that would make him or her less credible as a witness. For example, if the police officer had a history of lying under oath or in police reports, a record of using excessive force, or even disciplinary actions for work issues, those could all be issues used by your Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer to show that this officer is not trustworthy and should not be believed.
For more than 40 years, defendants in criminal defense cases have had the right to access this type of information in police officers’ personnel files. This makes sense; if a police officer has a history of lying (for example), a defendant should be able to use that information to show that the officer might be lying this time. But a new ruling in Los Angeles County may prevent criminal defendants from using this information.
In a July ruling from the Second District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles, a court held that police files are confidential under state law and cannot be revealed to the district attorney or to anyone else unless a criminal defense attorney requests the information and the judge grants the request and authorizes disclosure. This case arose after the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department made a list of approximately 300 deputies with records of misconduct that could potentially be used against them if they were called to testify. The Sheriff’s Department intended to give this list to the District Attorney’s office so that it could notify a Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer if one of the deputies on the list was called as a witness in a case, and then a private judicial hearing could be held to determine if the personnel records should be disclosed.
However, the Court of Appeal determined that unless the specific procedure outlined in the ruling was followed, any disclosure of a police officer’s personnel file or misconduct record — even to a prosecutor — would cause “irreparable harm to the individual” and is prohibited by law.
Prior to this ruling, similar lists have been made and turned over the prosecutors in counties across the state of California, including in San Francisco, Alameda, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. This ruling will likely make it more difficult for defendants in criminal cases to obtain evidence of potential misconduct by police officers.
However, a defense lawyer can still make a motion — known as a Pitchess motion — to request information on a police officer’s recent misconduct. A skilled Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer can aggressively pursue this type of information as part of an overall defense strategy.
At the Chambers Law Firm, we are experienced at defending clients against criminal charges and cross examining police officers who have committed misconduct. We work hard to defend our clients, and will fight for your rights and freedom. Contact us today at 714-760-4088 or dchambers@clfca.com to schedule a free initial consultation and learn more about how we can help you.
