Jackson v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 69·69 Cal. App. 4th 769·81 Cal. Rptr. 2d 814·99 Daily Journal DAR 1053·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 867
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 1999B113311California4,729 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

The appellant, Vance Jackson, a Los Angeles police officer, asks us to reverse the judgment of the trial court which rejected his petition for administrative mandamus brought under Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5 to set aside a disciplinary suspension imposed upon him by the chief of police of the respondent City of Los Angeles (City). Because we conclude that the administrative proceedings conducted by the police department with respect to the charges brought against Jackson were lawful and fully authorized by the Los Angeles City Charter, we affirm the judgment.

Factual and Procedural Background

In January of 1995, Jackson, who had then been a police officer for about seven years, testified at a police department board of rights hearing of a complaint filed against three other officers. These officers, who were off duty at the time, had been charged with misconduct in connection with their failure to control a crime scene where a shooting had occurred and to identify themselves to the on-duty police officers who had responded to the scene.

The three officers and Jackson all had worked as off-duty security at the Mayan Club near 11th and Hill Streets in…

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.