James

James v. City of Coronado

Good Law
106 Cal. App. 4th 905·131 Cal. Rptr. 2d 85·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 313·2003 Daily Journal DAR 2409·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1870
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 30, 2003No. D039686California2,397 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

McConnell, J.

Keith James, Mark Porter and the Coronado Police Officers’ Association (collectively the plaintiffs where appropriate) obtained a writ of mandate requiring the City of Coronado, the Coronado Police Department and Chief of Police Robert Hutton (collectively the Department) to provide an evidentiary hearing before a neutral fact finder in order for James and Porter to challenge memoranda placed in their personnel files for use in their next performance reviews. The court determined James and Porter “are entitled to introduce evidence but not to confront and cross[-] examine witnesses.” On appeal, the plaintiffs contend that an administrative *908 appeal required under Government Code 1 section 3304, subdivision (b), a provision of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (the Bill of Rights Act; § 3300 et seq.), necessarily includes the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. We affirm the judgment.

Background

James and Porter are police officers and permanent employees of the Department. The Department investigated unrelated claims of misconduct against the officers. It determined that James opened a box of materials not addressed to him 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.