Laserfiche WebLink
1 54. Penal Code §832.7(f) (1) mandates that"The department or agency shall <br /> 2 provide written notification to the complaining party of the disposition of the complaint <br /> 3 within 30 days of the disposition." <br /> 4 55. The City of Santa Ana and Santa Ana Police Department have <br /> 5 established and published procedures for receiving and investigating complaints. The <br /> 6 1 established procedures indicate that complaints will investigated and the party <br /> 7 submitting the complaint will be notified of the results by mail. <br /> 8 56. The procedure for addressing citizen complaints the department <br /> 9 established and published obligated the department to conduct an investigation into the <br /> 10 allegations of the complaint that was sufficient to allow a decision-maker make four <br /> 11 possible findings, and the procedure obligated the Chief of Police to make one of those <br /> 12 findings with respect to each allegations of misconduct. Defendants did not comply <br /> 13 with these obligations, and Plaintiffs are entitled to a writ of mandate compelling <br /> 14 defendants to perform their ministerial duty to satisfy the obligations imposed by the <br /> 15 department's published procedure. (See Galzinski v. Somers, (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th <br /> 16 1164). <br /> 17 57. Plaintiff filed a complaint and request for investigation and Defendants <br /> 18 failed to either investigate the allegations of misconduct (which were also violations of <br /> 19 state law and possible misdemeanor offenses) and/or refused to notify Plaintiff POA of <br /> 20 the outcome of the investigation. <br /> 21 58. Defendants had a ministerial duty to investigate the POA's citizen's <br /> 22 complaint and to render a finding on that complaint in compliance with the complaint <br /> 23 procedure the department established and made public pursuant to subdivision (a)(1) of <br /> 24 Penal Code section 832.5. (See Gregory v. State Bd. of Control (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th <br /> 25 584 (`[a] public entity has a ministerial duty to comply with its own rules and regulations <br /> 26 where they are valid and unambiguous); Pozar v. Department of Transportation (1983) <br /> 27 145 Cal.App.3d 269 (a writ of mandate may be issued to compel a public agency to <br /> 28 follow its own internal procedures.). <br /> 12 <br /> COMPLAINT <br />