|
PBA Brings Stop to CRB Investigations |
|
|
|
|
Monday, 01 June 2009 |
|
On May 29, 2009 the Fifth District Court of Appeal brought an end to investigations of alleged police misconduct by the Orange County Citizens Review Board finding that such investigations were unconstitutional and in direct conflict with the Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights. The decision, Demings v. Orange County Citizens Review Board, was the result of a lawsuit filed by the Florida PBA on behalf of an Orange County deputy sheriff who was subpoenaed to testify before the review board which was investigating him, even though he had been already been cleared of any misconduct charges by the Sheriff’s Office.
As many of you know, the creation of local citizen review boards is an increasingly popular “political” solution to allegations of police misconduct. More and more local governments (and local politicians) view these boards as a way to avoid criticism of the manner in a local law enforcement agency handles its internal affairs investigations, specifically allegations of excessive force or misuse of police authority. Obviously, the benefit to the politicians is the avoidance of the wrath of voters and other special interest groups by establishing the boards to do a “fair and objective” investigation.
This was just the situation in the Demings case in which the review board subpoenaed an Orange County deputy sheriff to testify before it. When the deputy refused to honor the subpoena based upon the advice of the PBA, a lawsuit was filed to enforce the subpoena. The deputy, through the PBA, responded claiming the investigative powers of the board were unconstitutional because they were in conflict with the LEO Bill of Rights. The Sheriff’s Office, to its credit, supported the deputy, joining in the lawsuit and claiming that, in addition to the conflict with the bill of rights, the board’s powers were in conflict with the Sheriff’s authority as a constitutional officer.
The PBA and the sheriff lost the first legal battle before the circuit court, but the result from the district court was far better. The district court found that language of the LEO Bill of Rights made it clear that, except for limited circumstances, the investigative procedures outlined in the statute were the exclusive procedure for investigating officer misconduct. The court held that the citizens review board’s investigative authority conflicted not only with the LEO Bill of Rights, but also with the independence of the Sheriff. It concluded the investigative authority granted to the board is unconstitutional and void.
While the Florida PBA is hopeful that the litigation on this issue will end, in all likelihood this is just the second stage of the litigation with the next stop being the Florida Supreme Court. In the meantime, the decision will provide valuable ammunition for opponents of the citizen review board process. As explained by Florida PBA President John Rivera: “Our members have always been opposed to the concept of these boards manned by civilians who know little, if anything, about police work. The PBA felt action was necessary to stop them, so we took that action. That is why we are the PBA.”
A special thanks goes out to Stewart Cohen, counsel for the Central Florida PBA, and Hal Johnson, General Counsel for the Florida PBA, for their hard work on this case. Also, another thank you goes out to Sheriff Demings and his attorney, Eric Dunlap, for continuing the fight alongside the PBA in this legal battle.
|
Wages Lawsuit![Crotty-at-Parade-for-Bush[1].jpg](http://cfpba.org/images/zoom/legislation/Crotty-at-Parade-for-Bush[1].jpg)
