Parra

Parra v. City and County of San Francisco

Good Law
144 Cal. App. 4th 977·50 Cal. Rptr. 3d 822
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 30, 2006A112331California8,331 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richman, J.

This case of first impression involves the application of the one-year limitation provision governing discipline of police officers contained in the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (Gov. Code, § 3300 et seq.), and particularly whether that provision was tolled or extended. The issue arises out of the investigation of, and the criminal charges filed in connection with, the notorious incident in November 2002 involving three off-duty San Francisco police officers which came to be known as “Fajitagate.”

Appellants here, petitioners below, are seven San Francisco police officers who became involved in various ways with the incident, and were charged with violations of departmental orders and rules of conduct. The charges were not brought until July 2004, and appellants filed motions to dismiss them as untimely. The motions were denied by the San Francisco Police Commission, and appellants’ petitions for administrative mandamus were denied by the superior court.

We conclude that at least one tolling provision and one extension provision applies in the circumstances here, the effect of which was to extend the limitation provision and render the charges…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.