Request #20-497
  Open

SB 1421

Officers: 

 

Cross 39962

Sgt. Herrea 38508

Gundell 41806

Pineda 39942

St. Solis 32316

Mejia 40376

Vazquez N2130

Brady 42338

Lopez 38749

Lt. Rippe 33072

Ferguson 40281

Sgt. Ward 30923

Gomez 42758

# 32219 (No name provided)

Bangphrakay 33968

Martin 33678

Zizzo 41603

Mercado 39108

Cruz 41399 

Kanzoghian 42315

Pittinato 35704

Pal 42172

Castro 35368

Steward 34395

Luevano 41619

Donovan 40581

Klohr 32866

Camacho 41773

Dineen 38084

Castaneda 38035

Oliver 37349

Lt. II Gabaldon 31356

Hollomon V8201

Motts 39456

Madero 31069

Thomas V9275

Cohen 40760

Holmes 36499

Chance G9237

Faber 35848

A. 27568

 


Received

January 17, 2020 via mail


Departments

Police Department (LAPD)

Documents

Public

(loading...)

Staff

Point of Contact

LAPD Analyst Shavonne N3662

Due Date Changed Public
07/13/2020 (was 04/10/2020). Reviewed the request and noted awaiting redacted records; therefore due date was extended.
April 10, 2020, 12:12pm
External Message   Hide Public

Dear Requester:

This is a follow up to the Department’s response to your CPRA request submitted in January, 2019, for disclosable records pursuant to Penal Code § 832.7(b)(1) for:

  1. Lamark Ferguson, Serial No. 40281
  2. Dax Martin Serial, No. 33678
  3. Carmen Mederos, Serial No. 31690

Your request was made under the California Public Records Act (the Act). The Department is cognizant of its responsibilities under the Act. It recognizes the statutory scheme was enacted to maximize citizen access to the workings of government. The Act does not mandate disclosure of all documents within the government’s possession. Rather, by specific exemption and reference to other statutes, the Act recognizes that there are boundaries where the public’s right to access must be balanced against such weighty considerations as the right of privacy, a right of constitutional dimension under California Constitution, Article 1, Section 1. The law also exempts from disclosure records that are privileged or confidential or otherwise exempt under either express provisions of the Act or pursuant to applicable federal or state law, per California Government Code Sections 6254(b); 6254(c); 6254(f); 6254(k); and 6255.

The Department also recognizes that Penal Code Section 832.7 – which generally makes all peace officer personnel records confidential and undisclosable – was amended on January 1, 2019, by Senate Bill 1421 to create an exception from that general confidentiality requirement for the following four categories of officer personnel and investigatory records:  records relating to the report, investigation, or findings of (i) an incident regarding an officer-involved shooting; (ii) an incident involving the use of force by an officer resulting in death or great bodily injury; (iii) an incident involving a sustained finding of sexual assault by an officer involving a member of the public; and (iv) an incident involving a sustained finding of dishonesty by an officer directly related to the reporting, investigation, or prosecution of a crime or of the investigation of misconduct by another officer.  Pen. Code § 832.7(b)(1)(A)-(C).

 

The Department has completed its search for disclosable records pursuant to Penal Code § 832.7(b)(1) and did not locate any records relating to sustained complaints of sexual assault, sustained complaints of dishonesty, discharge of a firearm at a person, use of force resulting in great bodily injury, or use of force resulting in death for Lamark Ferguson, Serial No. 40281.

 

The Department has determined there are no disclosable records pertaining to sustained complaints of sexual assault or sustained complaints of dishonesty, however the Department does maintain disclosable records of discharge of a firearm at a person, or use of force resulting in great bodily injury or death pursuant to Penal Code § 832.7(b)(1) for:

 

 

  1. Dax Martin, Serial No. 33678: F010-15, LERI 2/07/2015
  2. Carmen Mederos, Serial No. 31069: F059-15, LERI 7/15/2015

 

Please note that, pursuant to Penal Code Section 832.7(b)(5), the Department is required to redact disclosable records for several enumerated purposes, including to remove personal data or information; to protect the anonymity of complainants and witnesses; to protect confidential medical, financial, or other similar information; and where disclosure of the record would pose a significant danger to the physical safety of the subject officer or other persons.  Furthermore, for electronic records, the CPRA provides that the cost to perform such redactions “shall” be borne by the requestor.  See Govt. Code 6253.9(b)(2) (providing that a person requesting electronic records under the CPRA “shall bear the cost of producing a copy” of such records where data compilation, extraction, or programming is required to produce the record); National Lawyers Guild v. City of Hayward, 27 Cal. App. 5th 937 (2018) (holding that a public agency was entitled under Section 6253.9 to charge a requester for costs it incurred to edit and redact nondisclosable material from police body camera videos). 

 

At this time, the Department is still in the process of identifying all possible records responsive to your request.  Should audio/video materials be located and you would like a copy, the Department will then provide you with an estimate of time that will be required for an employee to complete the redactions/or programming with a cost rate of the person(s) who will be completing the work for a total cost estimate.  Upon receipt of payment, the Department will begin performing the required redactions in order to produce the responsive records. 

 

In regards to the above records we have identified responsive to your request, due to the large number of requests for similar records the Department is processing pursuant to the above criteria, we are currently unable to provide you with an estimated date records responsive to your request will be available.  However, we will continue to provide you updates on any future developments regarding your request, including when the records are available.  Thank you again for your patience and understanding. 

 

We also invite you to visit our SB1421 web page, where you will find similar requested records related to officer involved shootings, uses of force with great bodily injury, sustained complaints of sexual assault, and sustained complaints of dishonesty published on our web page.  The Department uploads documents on a weekly basis when documents become available.  Please see link below.

 

http://www.lapdonline.org/lapdsb1421

 

 

If you have any questions or concerns, please respond to this email.

 

 

 

Respectfully,

 

LAPD Discovery Section, CPRA Unit

 

 

 

April 8, 2020, 1:51pm by LAPD Analyst Shavonne N3662 (Staff)
Due Date Changed Public
04/10/2020 (was 02/10/2020).
February 10, 2020, 2:27pm
Document(s) Released Public
https://lacity.nextrequest.com/documents?folder_filter=F012-13
February 10, 2020, 2:04pm
Document(s) Released Public
https://lacity.nextrequest.com/documents?folder_filter=F005-16
February 10, 2020, 2:04pm
External Message   Hide Public

 

Dear Requester:

 

 

The Department has uploaded documents responsive to your request for Jess Faber, Serial No. 35848, and Brett Cohen, Serial No. 40760 :

 

F012-13 February 7, 2013 Christopher Dorner (Faber, Serial No. 35848

F005-16 January 16, 2016 Alfred Longoria

 

Please click on the link provided in Documents section or copy and paste this link on your browser: 

 

https://lacity.nextrequest.com/documents?folder_filter=F012-13

https://lacity.nextrequest.com/documents?folder_filter=F005-16

 

The Department will continue its search, review, and disclosure process for records responsive to your request. Please check back periodically for any future updates on the link provided. 

 

The Department is working on providing the redaction cost for the 911call.

 

 

If you have any questions, please respond to this email.

 

 

Respectfully,

 

LAPD Legal Affairs Division, CPRA SB1421 Unit

February 10, 2020, 2:04pm by LAPD Analyst Shavonne N3662 (Staff)
External Message   Hide Public

Dear Requester

 

I have reviewed your request to the Los Angeles Police Department (“Department”) under the California Public Records Act (Cal. Govt. Code section 6250, et seq., hereinafter the (“Act”) seeking personnel records of the listed officers.

 

First Name

Last Name

Serial

Joshua

Cross

39962

Heather

 Herrea

38508

Jonathan

Gundell

41806

Alenjandro

Pineda

39942

Michael

 Solis

32316

Anita

Mejia

40376

Marcos

Vazquez

N2130

Youssef

Brady

42338

Anthony

Lopez

38749

Robin

Robin

33072

Lamark

Ferguson

40281

Robert

 Ward

30923

Daylon

Gomez

42758

Aaron

Skiver

32219

Siamone

Bangphrakay

33968

Dax

Martin

33678

Thomas

Zizzo

41603

Eduardo

Mercado

39108

David

Cruz

41399

Georges

Kanzoghian

42315

Michael

Pittinato

35704

Amar

Pal

42172

Brenda

Castro

35368

Adriana

Steward

34395

Lorenso

Luevano

41619

Donovan

Anderson

40581

Roger

Klohr

32866

Marcos

 Moran Camacho

41773

Andrew

Dineen

38084

Engelbert

Castaneda

38035

Brian

Oliver 37349

37349

Richard

Gabaldon

31356

Kevin

Hollomon

V8201

Robert

Motts

39456

Carmen

Mederos

31069

Stephanie

Thomas

V9275

Brett

Cohen

40760

David

Holmes

36499

Marie

Chance

G9237

Jess

Faber

35848

Leonard

Calderon

27568

 

The Department is cognizant of its responsibilities under the Act.  It recognizes the statutory scheme was enacted to maximize citizen access to the workings of government.  The Act does not mandate disclosure of all documents within the government’s possession.  Rather, by specific exemption and reference to other statutes, the Act recognizes that there are boundaries where the public’s right to access must be balanced against such weighty considerations as the right of privacy, a right of constitutional dimension under California Constitution, Article 1, Section 1.  The law also allows for nondisclosure of records that are otherwise exempt under either express provisions of the Act or pursuant to applicable federal or state law, per California Government Code Sections 6254(a); 6254(b); 6254(c); 6254(k); and 6255.

 

The Department also recognizes that Penal Code Section 832.7 – which generally makes all peace officer personnel records confidential and undisclosable – was amended on January 1, 2019, by Senate Bill 1421 to create an exception from that general confidentiality requirement for the following four categories of officer personnel and investigatory records:  records relating to the report, investigation, or findings of (i) an incident regarding an officer-involved shooting; (ii) an incident involving the use of force by an officer resulting in death or great bodily injury; (iii) an incident involving a sustained finding of sexual assault by an officer involving a member of the public; and (iv) an incident involving a sustained finding of dishonesty by an officer directly related to the reporting, investigation, or prosecution of a crime or of the investigation of misconduct by another officer.  Pen. Code § 832.7(b)(1)(A)-(C).

 

The Department has conducted a search for records responsive to your request, and did not locate any records relating to discharge of a firearm, use of force resulting in great bodily injury, use of force resulting in death, sustained complaints of sexual assault, or sustained complaints of dishonesty pursuant to Penal Code § 832.7(b)(1) for:

 

First Name

Last Name

Serial

Responsive Records

Joshua

Cross

39962

No Responsive Record

Anita

Mejia

40376

No Responsive Record

Marcos

Vazquez

N2130

No Responsive Record

Youssef

Brady

42338

No Responsive Record

Robin

Robin

33072

No Responsive Record

Robert

 Ward

30923

No Responsive Record

Daylon

Gomez

42758

No Responsive Record

Siamone

Bangphrakay

33968

No Responsive Record

Eduardo

Mercado

39108

No Responsive Record

David

Cruz

41399

No Responsive Record

Georges

Kanzoghian

42315

No Responsive Record

Amar

Pal

42172

No Responsive Record

Lorenso

Luevano

41619

No Responsive Record

Donovan

Anderson

40581

No Responsive Record

Roger

Klohr

32866

No Responsive Record

Marcos

 Moran Camacho

41773

No Responsive Record

 

The Department has determined there are no disclosable responsive records pertaining to sustained complaints of sexual assault or dishonesty, however the Department does maintain disclosable responsive records for discharge of a firearm, or use of force resulting in great bodily injury or death for:

 

First Name

Last Name

Serial

Responsive Records

Heather

 Herrea

38508

F052-15

Jonathan

Gundell

41806

F048-17

Alenjandro

Pineda

39942

F079-09; F048-17

Michael

 Solis

32316

F004-98; F025-98; F023-04; F085-12

Anthony

Lopez

38749

F090-12; 2012157; 2022596

Aaron

Skiver

32219

F036-09; F052-14; F031-15; 2006553

Thomas

Zizzo

41603

F048-17; 2022756

Michael

Pittinato

35704

F005-15

Brenda

Castro

35368

F037-00; F048-17; 2022756

Adriana

Steward

34395

F028-02; F121-04

Andrew

Dineen

38084

F010-07

Engelbert

Castaneda

38035

F076-13

Brian

Oliver 37349

37349

F093-07; F071-10; F049-16

Richard

Gabaldon

31356

F060-98; F069-06; F060-98; F062-07

Robert

Motts

39456

2008076

Brett

Cohen

40760

F005-16; F011-17

David

Holmes

36499

F006-08; F011-09

Jess

Faber

35848

F068-02; F102-05; F012-13

Leonard

Calderon

27568

F075-06

 

The Department is still conducting a search for records disclosable under Penal Code § 832.7(b)(1) for:

 

First Name

Last Name

Serial

Lamark

Ferguson

40281

Dax

Martin

33678

Carmen

Mederos

31069

 

The following names are not currently/previously a peace officer or custodial officer with the Department, therefore a search for disclosable records pursuant to Penal Code § 832.7(b)(1) was not conducted. Rather, disclosable records remain privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under Government Code Sections 6254(c).  Section 6254(c) exempts from disclosure “personnel, medical or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 

 

First Name

Last Name

Serial

Kevin

Hollomon

V8201

Stephanie

Thomas

V9275

Marie

Chance

G9237

 

With respect to your request of the listed employees’ personnel records, the records responsive to your request remain privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under Government Code Sections 6254(c) and (k), and Penal Code Section 832.7(a).  Section 6254(c) exempts from disclosure “personnel, medical or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”  Section 6254(k) exempts records which are exempt from disclosure under federal or state law, including, but not limited to provisions of the Penal Code. Penal Code Section 832.7(a) states that peace officer personnel records and information contained within them are privileged and confidential and cannot be disclosed except through discovery pursuant to Sections 1043 and 1045 of the Evidence Code.  California case law holds that Evidence Code Section 1043 et seq. is the exclusive means to obtain peace officer personnel records, and as such, they are exempt from the disclosure provisions of the Act.  [See City of Hemet v. Superior Court (1995) 37 Cal. App. 4th 1411]. Therefore, I am denying your request.

 

Please note that, pursuant to Penal Code Section 832.7(b)(5), the Department is required to redact disclosable records for several enumerated purposes, including to remove personal data or information; to protect the anonymity of complainants and witnesses; to protect confidential medical, financial, or other similar information; and where disclosure of the record would pose a significant danger to the physical safety of the subject officer or other persons.  Furthermore, for electronic records, the CPRA provides that the cost to perform such redactions “shall” be borne by the requestor.  See Govt. Code 6253.9(b)(2) (providing that a person requesting electronic records under the CPRA “shall bear the cost of producing a copy” of such records where data compilation, extraction, or programming is required to produce the record); National Lawyers Guild v. City of Hayward, 27 Cal. App. 5th 937 (2018) (holding that a public agency was entitled under Section 6253.9 to charge a requester for costs it incurred to edit and redact nondisclosable material from police body camera videos). 

 

At this time, the Department is still in the process of identifying all possible records responsive to your request.  Should audio/video materials be located and you would like a copy, the Department will then provide you with an estimate of time that will be required for an employee to complete the redactions/or programming with a cost rate of the person(s) who will be completing the work for a total cost estimate.  Upon receipt of payment, the Department will begin performing the required redactions in order to produce the responsive records. 

 

In regards to the above records we have identified responsive to your request, due to the large number of requests for similar records the Department is processing pursuant to the above criteria, we are currently unable to provide you with an estimated date records responsive to your request will be available.  However, we will continue to provide you updates on any future developments regarding your request, including when the records are available.  Thank you again for your patience and understanding. 

 

We also invite you to visit our SB1421 web page, where you will find similar requested records related to officer involved shootings, uses of force with great bodily injury, sustained complaints of sexual assault, and sustained complaints of dishonesty published on our web page.  The Department uploads documents on a weekly basis when documents become available.  Please see link below.

 

http://www.lapdonline.org/lapdsb1421

 

 

If you have any question, please respond to this email.

 

Respectfully,

 

LAPD Discovery Section, CPRA Unit

February 10, 2020, 1:33pm by LAPD Analyst Shavonne N3662 (Staff)
Document(s) Released Public
20-497 -redacted.pdf
January 23, 2020, 12:06pm
Due Date Changed Public
02/10/2020 (was 01/27/2020).
January 23, 2020, 9:15am
Request Published Public
January 22, 2020, 2:31pm
External Message   Hide Public

Dear Requester:

I have reviewed your California Public Records Act request. 

Please be advised that, pursuant to California Government Code Section 6253(c), I have found that “unusual circumstances” exist with respect to the request due to the need to search for, collect, and review the requested records from other Department entities which are separate from the office processing the request.  Therefore, my staff will require the statutory fourteen days extension of time in which to respond.  A determination concerning your request will be made as soon as possible.

If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, simply respond to this email. 

Respectfully,

LAPD Discovery Section CPRA Unit

January 22, 2020, 2:30pm by LAPD Analyst Shavonne N3662 (Staff)
Department Assignment Public
Police Department (LAPD)
January 22, 2020, 10:53am
Request Opened Public
Request received via mail
January 22, 2020, 10:53am