City of Eureka v. Superior Court of Humboldt County

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 5th 755·2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 598·205 Cal. Rptr. 3d 134·44 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2563
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 19, 2016A145701ACalifornia3,403 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jones, J.

The issue in this case is whether a video of an arrest captured by a patrol car’s dashboard camera is a confidential “personnel record” under Penal Code sections 832.7 or 832.8. On the record before us, the answer is no. We conclude the juvenile court properly determined the arrest video is not a personnel record protected by the Pitchess statutes. (See Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 [ 113 Cal.Rptr. 897 , 522 P.2d 305 ] (Pitchess).) We therefore affirm the court’s order requiring the City of Eureka (City) to release a portion of the video to local reporter and real party in interest, Thadeus Greenson.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Arrest, Charges, and Interned Affairs Investigation

In December 2012, Eureka Police Sergeant Adam Laird and other Eureka police officers arrested H.M. (the minor). Sergeant Laird chased the minor, who “was pushed to the ground, fell to the ground, or just gave up and laid on the ground.” Another police officer arrived “in his patrol vehicle with its in-car video equipment activated.” The patrol car’s mobile audio video (MAV) recording system produced several videos of the arrest. The prosecution filed a Welfare and…

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.