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