Laserfiche WebLink
1 and/or Evidence Code §§1043-1046 re-alleges paragraphs 1-95, above, and further <br /> 2 allege as follows: <br /> 3 175. Penal Code 832.5(a) (1) provides "Each department or agency in this state <br /> 4 that employs peace officers shall establish a procedure to investigate complaints by <br /> 5 members of the public against the personnel of these departments or agencies, and <br /> 6 shall make a written description of the procedure available to the public." <br /> 7 176.Penal Code §832.7(f) (1) mandates that "The department or agency shall provide <br /> 8 written notification to the complaining party of the disposition of the complaint within 30 <br /> 9 days of the disposition." <br /> 10 177. The City of Santa Ana and Santa Ana Police Department have established <br /> 11 and published procedures for receiving and investigating complaints. The established <br /> 12 procedures state that complaints will investigated and the party submitting the <br /> 13 complaint will be notified of the results by mail. <br /> 14 178. The procedure for addressing citizen complaints that the department has <br /> 15 established and published obligated the department to conduct an investigation into the <br /> 16 allegations of the complaint that was sufficient to allow a decision-maker make one of <br /> 17 four possible findings, and the procedure obligated the Chief of Police to make one of <br /> 18 those findings with respect to each allegation of misconduct. Defendants did not comply <br /> 19 with these obligations and Plaintiffs are entitled to a writ of mandate compelling <br /> 20 defendants to perform their ministerial duty to satisfy the obligations imposed by the <br /> 21 department's published procedure. (See Galzinski v. Somers, (2016) 2 Cal.App.5tn <br /> 22 1164). <br /> 23 179. Plaintiffs filed complaints and requests for investigations and Defendants <br /> 24 failed to either investigate the allegations of misconduct (which were also violations of <br /> 25 state law and possible misdemeanor offenses) and/or refused to notify Plaintiff SAPOA <br /> 26 of the outcome of the investigation. <br /> 27 180. Defendants had a ministerial duty to investigate the SAPOA's and/or <br /> 28 Serrano's citizen's complaint and to render a finding on that complaint in compliance <br /> 39 <br /> COMPLAINT <br />