Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver

California's premier full-service law firm with an emphasis on the representation of peace officers in disciplinary, criminal, labor, workers' compensation, personal injury and other civil matters.

  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    • Labor Representation
    • Civil Litigation
    • Personal Injury
      • Example of Case Results
    • Workers’ Compensation
    • Maritime Law
    • Estate Planning
    • DOE Security Clearance Hearings
    • Peace Officers
    • Firefighters
    • EMS Agency Investigations
    • Criminal Defense
    • CalPERS Appeals
  • Our Team
  • Classes
  • Media
    • Bulletins
    • RLS in the News
  • Resources
    • Links
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
  • Clients
  • Career Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer

Oakland Police Department Administration Loses Again: Officer’s Suspension Overturned

July 15, 2013 by Hien Nguyen

By Harry Stern, Rains Lucia Stern, 07/15/13

In yet another installment of the serial rebukes of the Oakland Police Department’s “leadership by punishment” philosophy, an arbitrator has overturned an 8-day suspension of veteran Officer Wendy Cross.

As crime soars in the nation’s third most dangerous city, resources disappear, and arrests dwindle, the few officers left actually patrolling the streets are given the not-so-subtle message that any proactive police action will likely lead to discipline.  The net result is what has been described as “de-policing” and a surge in violent crime.

This vexing case arose out of two separate incidents: an alleged improper drunk in public arrest and a vehicle pursuit of a felony car theft suspect. I had the honor of representing Officer Cross and was assisted by associate attorney Jonathan Murphy.

The 647(f), Drunk-in-Public Arrest

In 2008, Officer Cross responded to an out of control party. The residence in question was a problem spot known for raucous gatherings with free flowing alcohol and other substances. Not surprisingly, the neighbors had become exasperated and regularly called police when things got out of hand.

In their second visit that evening, Officer Cross and her colleagues met down the street and approached in mass because the party had turned particularly wild. When Officer Cross and her backup attempted to clear the party they were met with threats and hostility.

Eventually the officers were able to get many of the partygoers to leave; however, a smaller group defiantly remained.  They refused to leave and were verbally harassing the officers before locking themselves in a garage from which they began playing loud music.

Officer Cross saw a man staggering out of the garage. The man stumbled in the driveway and then fell against the side of the building.  She could tell that the man was very drunk and believed he was unable to care for himself and so decided to take him into custody.

The Department determined that the arrest was improper because the drunken reveler was not “in public.”  This finding flew in the face of relevant case law and common sense.

The Pursuit

In late 2009, Officer Cross and her partner were on routine patrol in a marked car. Officer Cross was riding “shotgun” while her partner drove.  They heard a radio broadcast about a car chase. They joined the chase in order to allow a Sergeant (the only other car in the pursuit at the time) to fall back into his mandated supervisory role.  Officer Cross “called” the pursuit, communicating via radio with the other officers, dispatch and supervisors.  A sergeant and a lieutenant were on the radio monitoring the pursuit for its entire duration.

Officer Cross’s unit was only close to the lead car when they were “making corners.”  They followed about seven to eight city blocks behind the lead officer, on a straight away with no other traffic.  Officer Cross observed what she believed to be a deliberate attack on the lead officer’s vehicle.  Officer Cross saw the suspect’s vehicle ram the lead officer’s car causing it to jump the median and sending car parts to flying into the air.  However, what had actually happened was that the lead officer tried to “PIT” the stolen car.

The pursuit ended when the suspect failed to negotiate a turn and crashed his vehicle into a fence.  No one was injured.

The pursuit took place in the early hours of the morning, with virtually no traffic and clear conditions.  The pursuit weaved in and out of Oakland and San Leandro.  The fastest speed reported by Officer Cross was eighty miles per hour.

The pursuit was reviewed by the Department’s Safety Committee which found the pursuit to be out of compliance based on two risk factors: “speed” and “familiarity with the area.”  Keep in mind that Officer Cross was the passenger in the second car in a chase being actively monitored by a sergeant and lieutenant.

Determination of the Arbitrator

This case was heard by Arbitrator Walter Kawecki.  Arbitrator Kawecki found there was no just cause for discipline for the pursuit because he did not believe Officer Cross had authority to terminate the pursuit by overriding the supervising sergeant and watch commander, and because given the light traffic, good conditions and considering Officer Cross’s reasonable belief that she witnessed an assault on another officer’s vehicle, that a reasonable officer would have continued the pursuit until its completion.

The Arbitrator also found there was no just cause for discipline for the 647(f) arrest because the arrested man had no expectation of privacy in the driveway of a home that was not his residence, citing an unpublished case we discovered and then raised in our post-arbitration brief (Pankey v. City of Concord).  He did, however, uphold a one-day suspension for Officer Cross’s admitted failure to properly inventory a vehicle, in a matter that was combined with the other allegations.

Arbitrator Kawecki’s Award clearly reflected an appreciation for the difficulties and challenges facing officers on the streets.

Officer Cross was extremely pleased with the result and extends her sincere thanks to the Legal Defense Fund for their support and assistance.

Disclaimer: Case law and analysis can change over time. The information in this article is accurate as of the date the article was written and should not constitute legal advice. Always consult with an attorney.

Filed Under: Bulletins Tagged With: harry-s-stern, jonathan-murphy

Consultation Form

Offices across California to serve you.
Contact us now to schedule a consultation.
Contact form not loading? Click here!
Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver, PC publishes this website as a service to our clients and other friends for informational purposes only. It is not intended to be used as a substitute for specific legal advice or opinions, and the transmission of information through this website is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship between sender and receiver. Internet subscribers and online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

© 2023 Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver, PC. All Rights Reserved. | Disclaimer

We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
Do not sell my personal information.
Cookie settingsACCEPTREJECT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT
  • Contact Us

  • News Alerts

Official logo for Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver
Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver Logo
  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    ▼
    • Labor Representation
    • Civil Litigation
    • Personal Injury
      ▼
      • Example of Case Results
    • Workers’ Compensation
    • Maritime Law
    • Estate Planning
    • DOE Security Clearance Hearings
    • Peace Officers
    • Firefighters
    • EMS Agency Investigations
    • Criminal Defense
    • CalPERS Appeals
  • Our Team
  • Classes
  • Media
    ▼
    • Bulletins
    • RLS in the News
  • Resources
    ▼
    • Links
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
  • Clients
  • Career Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
Hotline phone numbers. Northern California: 925-609-1699. Southern California: 310-393-1486.