Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Street roots. (Portland, OR) 1998-current | View Entire Issue (Aug. 14, 2015)
Page 4 News Street Roots • Aug. 14-20, 2015 Show or tell Why aren't local law enforcement agencies following a state law when it comes to presenting warrants fo r arrest? BY EM ILY GREEN otherwise a physical copy is not given to them. The Clackamas County Sheriffs Office ocal police and sheriffs departments didn’t respond to multiple requests for charged with enforcing the laws of the comment about its arrest warrant land aren’t in compliance with one of procedures. the laws governing their authority to do so. Frustrated from years of representing According to Oregon state laws dictating clients arrested without ever seeing their arrest procedures by peace officers, anyone arrested under a warrant must be shown the arrest warrant, Metropolitan Public Defender Chris O’Connor filed an official arrest warrant at the time of their arrest complaint with Portland’s Independent The law states that if it’s not possible for Police Review Board in September, citing the officer to show the warrant to the the law and Portland Police Bureau’s arrestee at that time, it must be shown to department-wide failure to comply with state them “as soon as practicable.” statute. Of law enforcement agencies in the According to O’Connor, “This all shows a Portland metro area that responded to dangerous disregard for the rule of law. If Street Roots’ inquiries about their arrest they can't follow a basic, clear procedure the warrant procedures, none had a policy of legislature has ordered, why should we trust either showing the arrest warrant at the them on efforts to comply with the time of arrest or of showing it shortly (Department of Justice) settlement or thereafter. Most were unaware the law reduce racial profiling or comply with existed. Portland Police Bureau spokesperson Sgt hundreds of more complex procedures?” It is, however, policy among area Pete Simpson says that in the 23 years he’s departments for arresting officers to worked in law enforcement, he has “never verbally tell arrestees about the existence of heard of this ever Being done.” a warrant. Some departments, such as The requirement to produce an arrest Milwaukie and Hillsboro, will show persons warrant is one of seven straightforward under arrest the warrant information items listed under ORS 133.235, “Arrest by displayed on the data system computer a peace officer, procedure.” screen in the squad car, if they ask. The state agency responsible for training Other departments do n o t Simpson says and certifying police officers is the showing the screen data to arrestees is not Department of Public Safety Standards and Portland Police Bureau policy, but officers Training, or DPSST. According to its may allow arrestees to read the screen from director, Eriks Gabliks, the contents of this time to time, “but not likely often.” statute are taught in each of its 16-week “We show them the back of the car,” says Basic Police Courses in a procedural law Gresham police spokesperson Capt Claudio class. Grandjean, when asked what Gresham In Oregon, arraignments must take place officers show to people arrested under a within four days of warrant. the arrest, and it’s at The-general the arraignment, consensus among Simpson says, that "There is a fundam ental consti Portland-area people arrested tu tional is a ie rp in siia f to why department under a warrant by that statute exists." spokespeople is that PPB receive their ’ — C O N S TA N TIN SEVERE to show a warrant at P O R TLA N D ’ S INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW warrant information. the time of arrest This conflicts with would be impossible in PPB’s own directive most cases. Not every on arresting police officer carries around a hard copy of individuals under a warrant, which states, every arrest warrant, and people arrested “There is no need for the arresting member under a warrant are commonly apprehended to physically serve the verified warrant on when involved in a traffic stop or when an the arrested subject The warrant will be officer responds to a call. It isn’t until the served by (Multnomah County Sheriffs officer runs their name through the Law Office) staff during the booking process.” Enforcement Data System that the warrant But the warrant isn’t served at the time is discovered. of booking either. Lake Oswego Police Department The warrant, says Multnomah County spokesperson Sgt Tom Hamann says his Sheriff’s Office spokesperson L t Steven department doesn’t show warrants at the Alexander, is in electronic format in the Criminal Justice Information System, “so, no time of arrest 99.9 percent of the time either, but points out in State of Oregon y. it is not shown.” Thomas Meier, the court found that an Washington County Sheriffs Office arrest made on verified warrant information spokesperson Sgt Bob Ray says if people ask for a copy of their warrant at the time of listed in the computerized database is valid. O’Connor says this case deals with an booking, they are provided with it, individual claiming an arrest was without a STAFF W RITER B warrant and therefore unconstitutional, but the court found the state met the constitutional burden of arresting on a warrant. “Just because an individual can’t make a constitutional challenge to the arrest when the police do not meet the statutory requirement doesn’t mean that the police don’t have an independent obligation to follow the legislature’s orders,” he says. O’Connor says police policies seem to indicate, that “Because there is no remedy for a defendant at trial, the officer can violate the law.” “It is impracticable for the officer to take the arrested subject to the issuing jurisdiction to see the physical warrant,” says Beaverton police spokesperson, Officer Mike Rowe. O’Connor argues, in the context of Multnomah County, the earliest “practicable” time to show the person under arrest their warrant would be at the Justice Center upon booking, where the sheriffs office, district attorney, police bureau and court are all under one roof. “Yet no efforts are made by any of the officers to show the warrant either at the scene of the arrest or at the jail or any time after the arrest,” his complaint alleges. Physical warrants are signed by the presiding judge, and according to Multnomah County Circuit Court spokesperson Rachel McCarthy, they are delivered to the sheriff’s office at 5 p.m. each day for processing. Given the difficuties of producing a warrant on the spot at the time of arrest, we asked the Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office why it isn’t complying with state law by showing arrested persons their warrant at the time of booking, which appears, to be the earliest “practicable” time to serve i t Alexander says the booking office isn’t made aware of who is being arrested, so it is not able to have a warrant ready when the arrestee arrives. He says “if an arrestee asks what the warrant was for when they were arrested and are told and asks again at booking, we accommodate with that information as best we can.” Constantin Severe, director of the Independent Police Review, says O’Connor’s complaint is in line for review, and his agency will release its recommendations to Portland Police Bureau in “a couple months.” “The thing is,” says Severe, “there is a fundamental constitutional underpinning to why that statute exists.” The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution requires an arrest warrant when arrests are made without probable cause. The state statute in question, he says, has been in existence for 42 years, and there was an earlier versionof it as well. “I don’t see the statute changing,” he says. “I think it’s more of a technological fix than having to rewrite anything or (a) legislative solution.” He adds, “There has to be a really good reason for us not being in compliance with the statute.” If the government’s reason for noncompliance is “it’s just too hard,” he says that’s not a good enough reason. See WARRANTS, page 5
