City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 784·57 Cal. App. 4th 1506·67 Cal. Rptr. 2d 775·97 D.A.R. 12·97 Daily Journal DAR 12459
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 1997B112677California4,109 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

The City of Los Angeles (City) seeks our review of a trial court order excluding statements made by a police officer who was not informed that he was under investigation nor told the nature of the investigation. We conclude that the officer is protected under the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (Gov. Code, § 3303 et seq., hereafter the Act; further code citations are to the Government Code unless otherwise indicated.) We also conclude that the trial court’s order excluding the officer’s statements in response to questioning during the City’s case-in-chief was not an abuse of discretion. We modify the order, however, to allow introduction of the statements for impeachment.

Factual and Procedural Summary

Officer Merinio Labio, real party in interest, was on duty as a Los Angeles airport police officer during the night of January 18, 1996, and the following morning. Lieutenant Martinez was the watch commander on duty at the time. The airport police is an agency of the City. During this shift, a fatal traffic accident occurred on Imperial Highway.

Shortly after the accident, Lieutenant Martinez and Sergeant Hoffman stopped at Lucky’s Donut Shop. The…

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.