seventeenth-quarterly-report.pdf

Seventeenth Quarterly Report of the Independent Monitor for the Oakland Police Department April 28, 2014 Page 31 • Special Order 8536, Probable Cause Arrest Authorization and Report Review: In December 2006, OPD published Special Order 8536, Probable Cause Arrest Authorization and Report Review. This policy incorporates the requirements of Task 18. • Training Bulletin I-O.4, Legal Aspects Of Searching Persons On Parole And Probation: In November 2011, OPD published Training Bulletin I-O.4, Legal Aspects Of Searching Persons On Parole And Probation. The purpose of the Training Bulletin is to guide OPD members on documenting the means of confirming the status of the parolee or, if a probationer, their status and whether an appropriate search clause exists. The Training Bulletin also provides guidance in situations where inconsistent information is discovered in AWS, CORPUS, or CRIMS regarding a probationer’s status.10 As the Department has trained at least 95% of relevant personnel on the above-listed policies, we find OPD in continued Phase 1 compliance with this Task. Task 18.2.2 requires that supervisors review arrest documentation to verify that available witnesses are identified (compliance standard: 90%). To assess Phase 2 compliance with this subtask, we reviewed arrest documentation for all of the applicable arrest categories, as well as documentation for arrests resulting in an investigated use of force. Specifically, we reviewed a random sample of 69 adult and five juvenile arrest reports documenting felony arrests; drug arrests; and arrests for Penal Code 69, 148, and 243(b)(c); as well as documentation for 17 arrests resulting in an investigated use of force; that occurred between October 1, and December 31, 2013. We reviewed these arrests to determine if supervisors reviewed the reports that listed witnesses or appropriately noted “no known witnesses,” or referred to a canvass with no witnesses produced. In keeping with previous practice, if there was no mention of any witnesses in the crime report narrative, we accepted a “0” in the “witness” box on the cover sheet as sufficient documentation. Of the 69 adult arrest reports, we excluded 51 from our dataset; and of the five juvenile arrest reports, we excluded four from our dataset; for one or more of the following reasons: the arrest involved a warrant or probation or parole warrant detention; the arrest occurred outside of our selected time period; the incident was, in fact, a psychiatric detention that did not involve an arrest; or the arrest involved a misdemeanor offense that was not one of the arrests applicable to Task 18.2.2. Of the remaining 18 adult arrests, there was one report that did not document the presence of witnesses or no known witnesses; and all arrests were approved by a supervisor. The one relevant juvenile arrest documented the presence or witnesses or no known witnesses, and the arrest was approved by a supervisor. This represents a 95% compliance rate relating to adult/juvenile arrests for this subtask. In addition, of the 17 arrests resulting in an investigated use of force, all were in compliance with Task 18.2.2.11 This represents a 100% compliance rate among arrests resulting in an investigated use of force for this subtask. 10 Automated Warrant System, Criminal Oriented Records Production Unified System, or Consolidated Records Information Management System. 11 This number includes only Level 1, 2, and 3 uses of force because per DGO K-4, the documentation of witnesses of Level 4 uses of force is not required. Case3:00-cv-04599-TEH Document979 Filed04/28/14 Page32 of 88