An Arrest Without The Filing Of An Accusatory Pleading Is Just A Detention

On August 1, 2016, the California Court of Appeal, 2nd District, held, in Schmidt v. California Highway Patrol, that if a person is arrested, but no accusatory pleading is filed with a court, the arrest shall be deemed a detention only.
Further, the arresting agency must issue the arrested person a certificate stating it was a mere detention, and the Department of Justice must delete any reference to an arrest from its records.

Facts

On May 1, 2011, John J. Schmidt was arrested by the CHP for driving under the influence. He was booked into the Santa Barbara County jail and released later that day on his own recognizance. Schmidt signed a notice to appear in court. The CHP sent Schmidt’s arrest report to the Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s Office. The district attorney reviewed the referral and decided not to file charges “at this time.” The CHP did not provide Schmidt with a certificate describing his arrest as a detention. Nor did the CHP report the arrest as a detention to the Department of Justice.

Schmidt brought a class action against the CHP for a writ of mandate to compel the CHP to provide him with the certificate. The trial court certified the class and granted Schmidt’s writ petition.
The court also awarded Schmidt attorney fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, the private attorney general statute, in the amount of $296,100. The Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court’s decision.

Court Discussion

Penal Code Section 849.5 provides: “In any case in which a person is arrested and released and no accusatory pleading is filed charging him with an offense, any record of arrest of the person shall include a record of the release. Thereafter, the arrest shall not be deemed an arrest, but a detention only.” (Emphasis added.)

Section 851.6, subdivision (b) provides: “In any case in which a person is arrested and released and no accusatory pleading is filed charging him with an offense, the person shall be issued a certificate by the law enforcement agency which arrested him describing the action as a detention.” (Emphasis added.)

Finally, section 851.6, subdivision (d) provides: “Any reference to the action as an arrest shall be deleted from the arrest records of the arresting agency and of the Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation of the Department of Justice. Thereafter, any such record of the action shall refer to it as a detention.” (Emphasis added.)

The Court of Appeal stated that “(t)he language of the statutes is clear and unambiguous. Applying the plain, commonsense meaning, a person is ‘released’ when free to leave police custody, whether the person is released on a notice to appear, own recognizance or bail.”

“A notice to appear may be an ‘accusatory pleading’ when it is filed with the court. But the CHP cites no authority holding that a notice to appear may constitute an accusatory pleading without being filed with the court. The ordinary meaning of a pleading is that it is a document filed with the court.”

HOW THIS AFFECTS YOUR AGENCY

The Records Supervisor for the Santa Barbara Police Department testified to her office’s procedure when the police department refers a case to the district attorney and the district attorney’s office sends a notice to the police department that the case has been rejected. She testified that they “update our files to indicate that the arrest is now considered a detention. It’s no longer considered an arrest. So we do update our files to reflect that information. We also prepare the detention certificate to send to the person that was arrested.”

As the Court of Appeal stated, “The language of the stat
utes is clear and unambiguous.” In all cases where a person has been arrested, but no accusatory pleading is filed with the court, the process set forth above must be followed. The Court issued a Writ of Mandate compelling the CHP to:

1. Issue certificates of detention to [all] class members.

2. Delete any references to the action as an arrest from each class member’s arrest records of the CHP and make written notice of each class member’s case disposition to the Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation records of the Department of Justice.

3. Include a record of release for each class member immediately upon receipt of this Peremptory Writ and have the commands set forth herein completed on or before October 9, 2014, with verification of compliance presented to this Court at a case management conference set for October 29, 2014, at 8:30 a.m.

Furthermore,

4. CHP shall conduct a diligent search in all databases that they have access to for each and every class member, including individuals who fall within the definition of the class but were arrested by CHP after June 1, 2012, to determine their current address and mail them each a certificate of detention.

5. CHP must comply and apply the aforementioned commands to future eligible arrestees who are arrested by CHP, released from custody, and who do not have an accusatory pleading filed against them in a court of law.”

As such, it is important for all law enforcement agencies inform their records divisions to comply with the law by (1) issuing such a certificate; (2) changing the official records to reflect the arrest as a detention; and (3) notify DOJ’s Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation of the Department of Justice to correct their records, as well.

As with all legal issues, it is important to secure and follow the advice of your agency’s designated legal counsel.

But, as always, if you wish to discuss this case in greater detail, please feel free to contact me at (714) 446 – 1400 or via email at mjm@jones-mayer.com

Information on www.jones-mayer.com is for general use and is not legal advice. The mailing of this Client Alert Memorandum is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.