Judge agrees ex-LA County Sheriff won’t face contempt hearing.
Former LA County Sheriff Alex Villanueva Spared Contempt Hearing by Judge
A state appellate court ruling has granted former Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva a reprieve from facing a contempt hearing for allegedly ignoring three subpoenas in 2021. The subpoenas were issued by the Civilian Oversight Commission (COC), but the county argued that the door to a contempt proceeding was not completely closed.
Judge Elaine Lu of the Los Angeles Superior Court announced her decision on October 13, following a directive from a three-justice panel of the Second District Court of Appeal. The panel ordered Judge Lu to vacate her previous ruling, which granted the county’s contempt petition, and instead deny it without prejudice. Mr. Villanueva had sought appellate review of Judge Lu’s initial ruling.
The county, however, filed court papers on October 6, expressing its intention to ask the appellate court to amend its ruling. The county argued that the justices’ order actually supports their position, allowing them to seek contempt under the COC’s subpoena authority through a one-step procedure.
Related Stories
The county’s documents stated, “Accordingly, the order does not appear to set forth any reason to fully deny the petition.”
However, Judge Lu’s ruling emphasized that the contempt process involves two steps. She pointed out that the county had already presented the same argument to the appellate court, which was “squarely rejected” by the justices.
“In any event, on the merits, the court finds the county’s argument unpersuasive,” Judge Lu wrote.
The subpoenas, issued between September and November 2021, required Mr. Villanueva to provide sworn virtual testimony before the COC. The testimony was regarding the sheriff’s reasons for initiating investigations into public officials overseeing the Sheriff’s Department and the department’s policy on internal deputy cliques, such as the Banditos.
County attorney Harvinder S. Anand alleged that these internal groups have “plagued the Sheriff’s Department for decades.”
According to Mr. Anand’s documents, Mr. Villanueva did not comply with all three subpoenas and refused to testify under oath. Mr. Anand stated, “Indeed, Sheriff Villanueva has flatly declared he will not agree to be placed under oath under any circumstance.”
Mr. Villanueva’s attorney, Linda Miller Savitt, argued in court papers that the COC’s demand for the sheriff to testify under oath is “inexplicable.” She claimed that the sheriff has agreed to voluntarily appear and that his right to due process is being violated.
“These subpoenas are not for a lawfully authorized purpose. Simply because the COC has subpoena power and they believe they are all-powerful is not enough,” Ms. Savitt stated. “Subpoena power is not unlimited; it is supposed to be used for a lawfully authorized purpose and can be abused.”
Ms. Savitt further contended that one of the three subpoenas interferes with the sheriff’s state law enforcement and criminal investigatory powers, which are expressly excluded from the COC’s jurisdiction.
Mr. Villanueva, who was elected in 2018, lost his bid for a second term to retired Long Beach Police Chief Robert Luna in 2022. On September 13, he announced his intention to challenge county Supervisor Janice Hahn in the March 2024 primary.
What steps can be taken to ensure a fair and thorough investigation into the allegations of misconduct and obstruction of justice within the Sheriff’s Department
He appellate court but failed to convince them. Judge Lu stated that the appellate court’s order only addressed the first step of the process, which is the determination of whether there has been a willful violation of a valid subpoena. It did not address the second step, which is the imposition of sanctions for contempt.
The subpoenas in question were issued by the COC as part of an investigation into allegations of misconduct within the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. The COC is an independent oversight body responsible for monitoring the Sheriff’s Department and ensuring transparency and accountability.
According to the COC, Sheriff Villanueva failed to comply with the subpoenas, which requested documents and testimony related to investigations into deputy misconduct and the reinstatement of an officer who had been previously dismissed. The COC filed a petition for contempt against Sheriff Villanueva, alleging that his refusal to comply with the subpoenas amounted to an obstruction of justice.
In response to the allegations, Sheriff Villanueva argued that the COC’s authority to issue subpoenas is limited and that the agency did not have the jurisdiction to investigate the matters in question. He also claimed that the subpoenas were overly broad and burdensome.
The dispute between Sheriff Villanueva and the COC highlights the ongoing tensions between the Sheriff’s Department and the oversight body. The COC has criticized the department for its handling of various issues, including the existence of deputy gangs and allegations of misconduct within the ranks.
The outcome of the contempt hearing, if it does proceed, could have significant implications for the relationship between the Sheriff’s Department and the COC. A finding of contempt against Sheriff Villanueva could be seen as a serious rebuke and may further erode public trust in the department’s leadership.
It remains to be seen how the appellate court will respond to the county’s request to amend its ruling. In the meantime, the investigation into deputy misconduct and the broader issues of transparency and accountability within the Sheriff’s Department continue to be a matter of concern for both the COC and the public.
As the legal battle between Sheriff Villanueva and the COC unfolds, it is crucial that the interests of justice, transparency, and oversight are prioritized. The outcome of this case will not only impact the individuals involved but also the broader community and their trust in law enforcement. Only through a fair and thorough investigation can the truth be revealed and appropriate actions taken to address any misconduct or wrongdoing within the department.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...