BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    







                      SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                             Senator Mark Leno, Chair                S
                             2009-2010 Regular Session               B

                                                                     1
                                                                     6
                                                                     9
          SB 169 (Benoit)                                             
          As Introduced February 14, 2009 
          Hearing date:  April 14, 2009
          Penal Code
          SM:mc


                            RETIRED PEACE OFFICERS: BADGES
                                           
                                       HISTORY

          Source:  Author

          Prior Legislation: SB 1212 (Cox) - 2008, failed on Senate Floor
                       SB 1942 (Karnette) - Ch. 430, Statutes of 2000

          Support: California State Sheriffs' Association

          Opposition:None known



                                        KEY ISSUES
           
          SHOULD THE HEAD OF A LOCAL AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS PEACE OFFICERS BE  
          AUTHORIZED TO ISSUE IDENTIFICATION IN THE FORM OF A BADGE, INSIGNIA,  
          EMBLEM, DEVICE, LABEL, CERTIFICATE, CARD, OR WRITING THAT CLEARLY  
          STATES THE PERSON'S POSITION AS AN HONORABLY RETIRED PEACE OFFICER  
          FROM THAT AGENCY?

          SHOULD THE HEAD OF A LOCAL AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS PEACE OFFICERS BE  
          AUTHORIZED TO REVOKE THIS FORM OF IDENTIFICATION IN THE EVENT OF  
          MISUSE OR ABUSE?




                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageB





                                       PURPOSE

          The purpose of this bill is to authorize the head of a local  
          agency that employs peace officers to issue identification in  
          the form of a badge, insignia, emblem, device, label,  
          certificate, card, or writing that clearly states the person's  
          position as an honorably retired peace officer from that agency  
          and to revoke that form of identification in the event of misuse  
          or abuse.

           Existing law  provides that any person other than one who by law  
          is given the authority of a peace officer, who willfully wears,  
          exhibits, or uses the authorized uniform, insignia, emblem,  
          device, label, certificate, card, or writing, of a peace  
          officer, with the intent of fraudulently impersonating a peace  
          officer, or of fraudulently inducing the belief that he or she  
          is a peace officer, is guilty of a misdemeanor.  (Penal Code   
          538d(a).)

           Existing law  provides that any person, other than the one who by  
          law is given the authority of a peace officer, who willfully  
          wears, exhibits, or uses the badge of a peace officer with the  
          intent of fraudulently impersonating a peace officer, or of  
          fraudulently inducing the belief that he or she is a peace  
          officer, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment  
          in a county jail not to exceed one year, by a fine not to exceed  
          two thousand dollars ($2,000), or by both that imprisonment and  
          fine.  (Penal Code  538d(b)(1).)

           Existing law  provides that any person who willfully wears or uses  
          any badge that falsely purports to be authorized for the use of  
          one who by law is given the authority of a peace officer, or  
          which so resembles the authorized badge of a peace officer as  
          would deceive any ordinary reasonable person into believing that  
          it is authorized for the use of one who by law is given the  
          authority of a peace officer, for the purpose of fraudulently  




                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageC

          impersonating a peace officer, or of fraudulently inducing the  
          belief that he or she is a peace officer, is guilty of a  
          misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to  
          exceed one year, by a fine not to exceed two thousand dollars  
          ($2,000), or by both that imprisonment and fine.  (Penal Code   
          538d(b)(2).)

           Existing law  provides that any person who willfully wears,  
          exhibits, or uses, or who willfully makes, sells, loans, gives,  
          or transfers to another, any badge, insignia, emblem, device, or  
          any label, certificate, card, or writing, which falsely purports  
          to be authorized for the use of one who by law is given the  
          authority of a peace officer, or which so resembles the  
          authorized badge, insignia, emblem, device, label, certificate,  
          card, or writing of a peace officer as would deceive an ordinary  
          reasonable person into believing that it is authorized for the  
          use of one who by law is given the authority of a peace officer,  
          is guilty of a misdemeanor, except that any person who makes or  
          sells any badge under the circumstances described in this  
          subdivision is subject to a fine not to exceed fifteen thousand  
          dollars ($15,000).  (Penal Code  538d(c).)

           Existing law  provides that any person who falsely represents  
          himself or herself to be a deputy or clerk in any state  
          department and who, in that assumed character, does any of the  
          following is 


          guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county  
          jail not exceeding six months, by a fine not exceeding two  
          thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or both the fine and  
          imprisonment:

                 Arrests, detains, or threatens to arrest or detain any  
               person.
                 Otherwise intimidates any person.
                 Searches any person, building, or other property of any  
               person.
                 Obtains money, property, or other thing of value.   
               (Penal Code  146a(a).)




                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageD


           Existing law  provides that any person who falsely represents  
          himself or herself to be a public officer, investigator, or  
          inspector in any state department and who, in that assumed  
          character, does any of the following shall be punished by  
          imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, by a fine  
          not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by  
          both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state  
          prison:

                 Arrests, detains, or threatens to arrest or detain any  
               person.
                 Otherwise intimidates any person.
                 Searches any person, building, or other property of any  
               person.
                 Obtains money, property, or other thing of value.   
               (Penal Code  146a(b).)
          
           Existing law  provides that any person who without authority  
          impersonates, or wears the badge of, a member of the California  
          Highway Patrol with intention to deceive anyone is guilty of a  
          misdemeanor.  (Vehicle Code  27.)

           Existing law  states that an individual authorized by Section  
          1299.02 to apprehend a bail fugitive shall not wear or otherwise  
          use a badge that represents himself or herself as belonging to  
          any part or department of the federal, state, or local  
          government.  (Penal Code  1299.07.)


           This bill  would authorize the head of a local agency that  
          employs peace officers to issue identification in the form of a  
          badge, insignia, emblem, device, label, certificate, card, or  
          writing that clearly states the person's position as an  
          honorably retired peace officer from that agency.


           This bill  states that the head of a local agency that employs  
          peace officers is authorized to revoke identification granted to  
          a retired peace officer or volunteer, as specified, in the event  




                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageE

          of misuse or abuse.


                    RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
          
          California continues to face a severe prison overcrowding  
          crisis.  The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)  
          currently has about 170,000 inmates under its jurisdiction.  Due  
          to a lack of traditional housing space available, the department  
          houses roughly 15,000 inmates in gyms and dayrooms.   
          California's prison population has increased by 125% (an average  
          of 4% annually) over the past 20 years, growing from 76,000  
          inmates to 171,000 inmates, far outpacing the state's population  
          growth rate for the age cohort with the highest risk of  
          incarceration.<1>

          In December of 2006 plaintiffs in two federal lawsuits against  
          CDCR sought a court-ordered limit on the prison population  
          pursuant to the federal Prison Litigation Reform Act.  On  
          February 9, 2009, the three-judge federal court panel issued a  
          tentative ruling that included the following conclusions with  
          respect to overcrowding:

               No party contests that California's prisons are  
               overcrowded, however measured, and whether considered  
               in comparison to prisons in other states or jails  
               within this state.  There are simply too many  
               prisoners for the existing capacity.  The Governor,  
               the principal defendant, declared a state of emergency  
               in 2006 because of the "severe overcrowding" in  
               California's prisons, which has caused "substantial  
               risk to the health and safety of the men and women who  
               work inside these prisons and the inmates housed in  
               ----------------------
          <1>  "Between 1987 and 2007, California's population of ages 15  
          through 44 - the age cohort with the highest risk for  
          incarceration - grew by an average of less than 1% annually,  
          which is a pace much slower than the growth in prison  
          admissions."  (2009-2010 Budget Analysis Series, Judicial and  
          Criminal Justice, Legislative Analyst's Office (January 30,  
          2009).)



                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageF

               them."  . . .  A state appellate court upheld the  
               Governor's proclamation, holding that the evidence  
               supported the existence of conditions of "extreme  
               peril to the safety of persons and property."  
               (citation omitted)  The Governor's declaration of the  
               state of emergency remains in effect to this day.

               . . .  the evidence is compelling that there is no  
               relief other than a prisoner release order that will  
               remedy the unconstitutional prison conditions.

               . . .

               Although the evidence may be less than perfectly  
               clear, it appears to the Court that in order to  
               alleviate the constitutional violations California's  
               inmate population must be reduced to at most 120% to  
               145% of design capacity, with some institutions or  
               clinical programs at or below 100%.  We caution the  
               parties, however, that these are not firm figures and  
               that the Court reserves the right - until its final  
               ruling - to determine that a higher or lower figure is  
               appropriate in general or in particular types of  
               facilities.

               . . .

               Under the PLRA, any prisoner release order that we  
               issue will be narrowly drawn, extend no further than  
               necessary to correct the violation of constitutional  
               rights, and be the least intrusive means necessary to  
               correct the violation of those rights.  For this  
               reason, it is our present intention to adopt an order  
               requiring the State to develop a plan to reduce the  
               prison population to 120% or 145% of the prison's  
               design capacity (or somewhere in between) within a  








                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageG

               period of two or three years.<2>

          The final outcome of the panel's tentative decision, as well as  
          any appeal that may be in response to the panel's final  
          decision, is unknown at the time of this writing.

           This bill  does not appear to aggravate the prison overcrowding  
          crisis outlined above.


                                      COMMENTS

           1.Need for This Bill  

          According to the author:

            Current law provides that any person who willfully wears,  
            exhibits, or uses, or who willfully makes, sells, loans,  
            gives, or transfers to another, any badge, insignia, emblem,  
            device, or any label, certificate, card, or writing, which  
            falsely purports to be authorized for the use of one who by  
            law is given the authority of a peace officer is guilty of a  
            misdemeanor (California Penal Code  538d(c)).

            SB 169 would empower the head of a local agency that employs  
            peace officers to bestow upon retirees an honorary badge,  
            emblem, device, label, certificate, card writing, or other  
            insignia that states that person's position as an honorable  
            retired peace officer from that agency.  This bill will give  
            these local agencies a valuable tool for honoring, upon  
            retirement, members of their agency who deserve such  
            recognition. 

          2.  Opinion of the Attorney General Regarding Honorary Badges  
          ---------------------------
          <2>  Three Judge Court Tentative Ruling, Coleman v.  
          Schwarzenegger, Plata v. Schwarzenegger, in the United States  
          District Courts for the Eastern District of California and the  
          Northern District of California United States District Court  
          composed of three judges pursuant to Section 2284, Title 28  
          United States Code (Feb. 9, 2009).



                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageH


          In response to a question from the District Attorney of  
          Riverside County, whether it is lawful for a sheriff to give  
          honorary badges to private citizens, the Attorney General issued  
          a formal opinion concluding that it is not.  (90 Cal. Op. Atty.  
          Gen. 57 (2007).)  The Attorney General's opinion examines the  
          language of Penal Code Section 538d, which prohibits false  
          impersonation of a peace officer.  That section specifically  
          provides that it is a crime for any person, other than one who  
          by law has the authority of a peace officer, to wear, exhibit,  
          or use the badge of a peace officer with the intent of  
          fraudulently impersonating a peace officer, or of fraudulently  
          inducing the belief that he or she is a peace officer.  The  
          Attorney General, citing its own opinion from 1985, explains,  
          "[t]he purpose of the prohibition is to prevent confusion among  
          members of the general public as to the identity or authority of  
          a person exhibiting a badge."  (Id. at p.4, citing 68 Cal. Op.  
          Atty. Gen. 11 at 13-14.)  Accordingly, "the more an honorary  
          badge resembles an authorized peace officer badge in shape,  
          markings, and other indicia that connote genuineness, the more  
          likely the badge will deceive an ordinary reasonable person, and  
          the more likely that a person furnishing or displaying the badge  
          will be found to have violated Section 538d."  (90 Cal. Op.  
          Atty. Gen. 57 at p.5.)

          SB 169 would authorize badges or other forms of identification  
          to be given to honorably retired peace officers who worked for  
          local agencies.  The bill, in an apparent attempt to comply with  
          the Attorney General's opinion, would require that the badge  
          clearly state the person's status as an honorably retired peace  
          officer.  The Attorney General's opinion addresses this issue:

              It has been suggested that the inscription "Public  
              Defender's Investigator" upon the face of a shield  
              or star badge would preclude any possible  
              misunderstanding on the part of an ordinary  
              person.  This, of course, would be a question of  
              fact depending upon the opportunity or ability of  
              the ordinary reasonable person to see or read the  
              badge and to comprehend its function.  Badges are  




                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageI

              often "flashed," i.e., briefly exhibited, and  
              persons may react to a badge "through fear or  
              respect."  [Citation.]  The circumstances under  
              which it is displayed or any statements made by  
              the person showing it will be factors in deciding  
              whether such badge deceives someone into believing  
              the one exhibiting it is indeed a peace officer.
              (90 Cal. Op. Atty. Gen. 57 at p.5, citing 68 Cal. Op.  
              Atty. Gen. 11 at 13-14.)

          The Penal Code specifically delineates the scope of authority  
          for each of an array of persons with some type of law  
          enforcement powers.  Where such persons are granted the  
          authority of a peace officer, section 538d is clear, they may be  
          issued badges under current law.  (The prohibition applies to  
          "[a]ny person, other than one who by law has the authority of a  
          peace officer . . ."  (Penal Code  538d(b).)  Where such  
          persons do not have the authority of a peace officer,  
          authorizing them to exhibit a badge that would lead an ordinary  
          person to believe they have such authority, would run counter to  
          the very purpose of the prohibition against impersonating a  
          peace officer contained in Section 538d, namely, to "prevent  
          confusion among members of the general public as to the identity  
          or authority of a person exhibiting a badge."  (90 Cal. Op.  
          Atty. Gen. 57 at p.4, citing 68 Cal. Op. Atty. Gen. 11 at  
          13-14.)

          With respect to retired peace officers, because such retired  
          officers retain no authority beyond that of an ordinary  
          citizen, any badge issued to them would be, in essence, an  
          honorary badge, in recognition of their past service.   
          Recognizing this service is important and desirable.  The  
          question this bill poses is whether it is appropriate to honor  
          this service by issuing a form of identification that could  
          easily mislead an average citizen into thinking this person  
          has retained some peace officer powers.  The fact that the  
          badge or ID card would state that the person is an honorably  
          retired peace officer would not alleviate that confusion.  How  
          many average citizens would know whether a retired peace  
          officer retains some peace officer powers?  Retired peace  




                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageJ

          officers are permitted to carry concealed weapons (Penal Code  
           12027, 120271) so this confusion would be well-founded.  

          There are many ways that honorably retired peace officers may  
          be recognized.  For example, a plaque or other ornament with  
          the officer's badge affixed.  Committee members may wish to  
          consider, what would be the intended purpose of carrying such  
          a form of identification if not to either give the impression  
          that the bearer retains some authority of a law enforcement  
          officer or perhaps to tacitly imply that the bearer should be  
          afforded some special treatment, perhaps by a fellow peace  
          officer.  

          WOULD ISSUING LAW ENFORCEMENT BADGES TO RETIRED PEACE OFFICERS  
          WHO HAVE NO LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY CREATE CONFUSION AMONG THE  
          PUBLIC AS TO THAT PERSON'S AUTHORITY?

          ARE THERE OTHER WAYS TO APPROPRIATELY RECOGNIZE THE SERVICE OF  
          RETIRED PEACE OFFICERS THAT WOULD NOT CARRY THE RISK OF GIVING A  
          FALSE IMPRESSION OF AUTHORITY?

          3.  Recent Problems With Badges  

          Just this past week an incident was reported in the  
          Sacramento Bee involving a 78-year-old retired police chief  
          who was arrested for impersonating an officer after he  
          allegedly brandished a badge and gun at a motorist, who he  
          felt had cut him off in traffic:

               A retired Placer County Sheriff's deputy faces charges  
               in Sacramento County stemming from a road-rage  
               incident earlier this year in Citrus Heights in which  
               he is suspected of pulling a gun, records show.

               The Sacramento County district attorney has charged  
               Buddy Trumbo, 78, a retired Placer County sheriff's  
               deputy, with two misdemeanor counts - brandishing a  
               weapon and impersonating a police officer, according  
               to documents filed in Sacramento County Superior  
               Court.




                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageK


               Trumbo - who also formerly was the police chief in  
               Plymouth, a small town in Amador County - is scheduled  
               for arraignment Wednesday stemming from the Feb. 6  
               incident.

               Trumbo is accused of flashing a badge and pulling a  
               gun on James Torrez, 46, of Citrus Heights after  
               Torrez allegedly cut him off coming out of a parking  
               lot near the corner of Auburn Boulevard and Van Maren  
               Lane, according to a Citrus Heights Police Department  
               report.

               Trumbo is accused of swerving his SUV in front of  
               Torrez at a nearby red light and holding a pistol at  
               him, all the while telling him he was under arrest and  
               trying to handcuff him, according to Torrez's  
               statement to police.

               "He was screaming at me to get on the ground and get  
               out of the car," Torrez said in an interview.

               Trumbo disputed the motorist's version of events in a  
               phone interview.  Trumbo said he did nothing wrong and  
               that he feared for his safety and the safety of  
               others.  He claimed Torrez was acting too erratically.

               "If he was a normal person, I could have just talked  
               to him," said Trumbo. "He screamed and yelled and  
               cursed me."

               Trumbo was cited and released following the incident.

               Trumbo said he planned to enter a not guilty plea.

               "I've carried a gun for 40 years and never had an  
               incident (until that day)," he said.

               If convicted, Trumbo could face jail time, according  
               to court documents.




                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageL


               Torrez said he's upset that Trumbo is not charged with  
               a felony.

               "I don't think (the charges) were a fair judgment on  
               what happened," Torrez said.

          (Retired Police Chief Arrested for Pulling a Gun in Citrus  
          Heights Road Rage Incident, Sacramento Bee, April 5, 2009.   
          http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/crime/archives/021286.html)
                                                      
          In recent years other incidents involving the misuse of badges  
          have gained wide publicity.  On January 22, 2007, the Los  
          Angeles Times stated in an editorial, "Speaker Fabian Nunez  
          (D-Los Angeles) has issued an order banning distribution of  
          official California State Assembly Commissioner badges simply  
          because of an unfortunate incident last year, in which a man  
          confronted by Redondo Beach police allegedly flashed a badge  
          issued by Assemblyman Mervin Dymally (D-Compton) and announced,  
          'You don't know who I am.'"  The Times editorial continued  
          sarcastically:

              There has been far too much of this spoilsport  
              privilege revoking lately.  Sure, an official  
              badge placed in your wallet may falsely suggest  
              that you are a law enforcement officer with the  
              power to arrest.  But that doesn't mean you  
              shouldn't be able to buy one.  A campaign  
              contribution ought to get you something tangible.   
              So what if a civilian in the Riverside County  
              sheriff's civilian support group allegedly used  
              his courtesy badge in 2004 to demand money from an  
              associate in a business dispute?  Or that a man in  
              2005 allegedly used a similar badge, issued by the  
              Orange County sheriff, to threaten golfers who  
              were playing ahead of him.

              Banning badges undermines a storied heritage of  
              abuse of privilege - a heritage with deep roots in  
              L.A.  It is here that a city police commissioner  




                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageM

              reportedly used his badge to bypass airport  
              security in 1995, and a building commissioner  
              allegedly used his badge while soliciting a  
              prostitute in 1996.  (We don't know if he said,  
              "Do you know who I am?" while trying to strike his  
              bargain, but we like to think he did.)






































                                                                     (More)











          On November 30, 2007, the Orange County Register reported:

              Santa Ana Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona,  
              already fighting public corruption charges, faces  
              new accusations that he doled out police badges  
              and concealed weapon permits to more than 80  
              political supporters who weren't given training,  
              according to a lawsuit filed this week by a  
              sheriff's department veteran.

              Darrell Poncy alleges Carona wanted him and former  
              Lt. Bill Hunt to devise a quick training course  
              for 80 to 90 individuals to be reservists, or  
              professional service volunteers, in the late  
              1990s, according to the lawsuit filed in Orange  
              County Superior Court Tuesday.

              Poncy worked for the department for 27 years,  
              until his retirement in August 2004, according to  
              the claim.

              Carona has faced repeated criticism over his  
              handling of the controversial reserve deputy  
              program.  He is criminally charged with appointing  
              family, friends and business associates of former  
              Assistant Sheriff Don Haidl as reserve deputies  
              because Haidl helped bankroll Carona's 1998  
              campaign.

          Confusion among members of the general public as to the identity  
          or authority of a person exhibiting a badge, creates substantial  
          public safety concerns and can result in truly horrendous  
          consequences.  On July 26, 2006, the Sacramento Bee reported:

              A man impersonating a police officer lured an  
              18-year-old woman into a car and sexually  
              assaulted her early Saturday morning, authorities  
              said.





                                                                     (More)







                                                            SB 169 (Benoit)
                                                                      PageO

               The incident was similar to four other assaults in  
              the region since October  , but authorities "have no  
              way to link" the crimes, said Sacramento Sheriff's  
              spokesman Sgt. R.L. Davis.

              According to police, the victim was outside a Jack  
              in the Box restaurant at Stockton Boulevard and  
              Elsie Avenue about 12:30 a.m. when the suspect  
              approached her, claiming to be a law enforcement  
              officer.  The suspect was wearing a dark collared  
              shirt, tan slacks  and a gold shield hanging from  
              his neck  , a Sheriff's Department news release  
              stated . . .  (emphasis added.)

          DO RECENT EVENTS REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF HONORARY BADGES  
          INDICATE THE POTENTIAL FOR ABUSE?

          COULD AUTHORIZING LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO ISSUE OFFICIAL  
          POLICE BADGES TO PERSONS WHO HAVE NO PEACE OFFICER AUTHORITY  
          CREATE A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY?


                                   ***************