Powers of citizen cops review panel are debated

Friday, July 1, 2005 | 11:10 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- The attorney for the Metro Police Citizen Review Board told the Nevada Supreme Court Thursday it has the authority to investigate officer misconduct that may include criminal behavior.

But Andrea Beckman added the board does not interfere with criminal investigations.

Bruce Judd, the lawyer representing the Las Vegas Police Protective Association, the Metro officers' union, argued that the powers of the board were limited to such things as discourteous treatment or racial slurs by an officer.

Judd said this review board should examine a complaint and if it falls within the criminal law, the board should not go further. He urged the court to review the 1997 state law and clarify the powers of the review board and whether it can subpoena police officers.

The court took the case under study and will rule later.

In a pre-hearing "friend of the court" brief, Allen Lichtenstein of the ACLU of Nevada urged the court to allow the review board to continue its work. He said the board "provides vital and long awaited oversight of the internal investigations of a police officer."

Lichtenstein said the board has "enhanced the trust of the community in law enforcement by providing a vital check."

The case involves an incident in December 2003 in Laughlin in which Officers Steven Leyba and Michael Giblen arrested Jarrod Lopez and searched his home without a warrant. Lopez filed a complaint with the citizen review board that turned it over to Metro Police for an investigation.

An internal investigation was conducted into allegations of false arrest and harassment. The officers were cleared but the case bounced back to the review board. The board subpoenaed both officers. The testimony given to the police Internal Affairs Bureau is confidential.

Giblen, a member of the police protective association, agreed to appear before the review board. Leyba, who is not a member of the association, declined to show up before the review board, even though he was subpoenaed.

District Judge Jessie Walsh said in January this year the review board could subpoena Leyba. But the Supreme Court stayed the subpoena to allow it to hear oral arguments.

Former state Sen. Joe Neal, a North Las Vegas Democrat, introduced the bill in 1997 to allow local governments to set up citizen review boards to review the actions of police officers.

Judd argued that law does not give these boards the right to look into possible criminal matters of police officers. And he said there is no right to subpoena.

Chief Justice Nancy Becker questioned if the police association "had standing" to appeal this case since officer Leyba was not a member of the association and is not being represented by the group.

Judd said the association represents 2,000 police officers at Metro and is the bargaining agent and advises and defends officers.

He argued the review board "cannot abridge the legal rights" of an officer to force him to testify.

Beckman, however, said there is no distinction in the law about whom the review board may subpoena. She said the protective association has no standing because Leyba was not a member and the association does not represent him.

She posed a rhetorical question -- why was the review board given subpoena powers if it could not investigate criminal misconduct.

The review board cannot take final action on a case but can make recommendations to the Clark County sheriff for potential discipline.

After the hearing, David Kallas, an official in the Las Vegas Police Protective Association, said the civilian review board wants the officer to testify against himself by use of the subpoena.

Kallas was asked whether the officer could assert the Fifth Amendment in the hearing. He agreed the officer could invoke the right to remain silent but added "it would end his career." He said there would be a suspicion the officer was hiding something if he invoked the Fifth Amendment. "If he takes the Fifth, from then on forward there is always a question of integrity."

The review board, Kallas said, has the statements given by the two police officers made at the Internal Affairs Bureau investigation. He said the board could call other witnesses.