Whether the NOPD's Public Integrity Bureau will change its policy, however, remains to be seen. Remi Braden, an NOPD spokeswoman, said Saturday that she had not yet had a chance to review the decision with the city's attorneys.
The ruling came as Sgt. Tyrone Robinson successfully appealed a 30-day suspension without pay he received following an accusation that he battered a female student in 2008 while working a detail at Walter L. Cohen High School.
The Public Integrity Bureau, or PIB, waited almost a year to complete the internal investigation into Robinson's alleged actions, but the appellate court said the bureau should have wrapped up that probe within four months, if not two, to comply with a state statute known as the "Police Officer's Bill of Rights." The court, therefore, dismissed Robinson's suspension, which the New Orleans Civil Service Commission had previously upheld.
Judge Max Tobias Jr. wrote in the 4th Circuit's ruling that "to adhere to the NOPD's argument would disembowel the Police Officer's Bill of Rights. This we decline to do."
"We are pleased the 4th Circuit's judgment stands," Robinson's attorney, Raymond Burkart III, said after the Supreme Court's decision. "And it is our hope that PIB reviews and conforms its internal policies to obey the 4th Circuit's judgment without fail."
Many types of complaints filed with the PIB yield both criminal and administrative investigations. In Robinson's case, for example, he was accused of simple battery, a criminal charge, and two administrative charges: violating departmental regulations governing moral conduct, and not checking in with his precinct in a timely manner after arriving at a paid detail.
Nearly eight months after PIB received the initial complaint, the city attorney's office dropped the battery case against Robinson, on Oct. 22, 2008. PIB started its administrative investigation that same day, court records show.
NOPD Capt. John Thomas testified that PIB's practice of deferring the time when the clock starts ticking on administrative investigations stems from the fact that under the U.S. Constitution, police officers, like civilians, cannot be compelled to give statements in a criminal investigation. In an administrative investigation, however, police officers can be forced to give a statement.
"So we let the criminal investigation run its course before compelling the person to give an administrative statement," Thomas said, according to court records.
The appellate court countered that, under the Police Officer's Bill of Rights, any administrative complaint against a cop must be investigated within 60 days of its filing, unless it is determined that there is a valid reason to extend that up to 120 days. Any discipline handed out beyond that time frame is null, the law states.
"Thomas admitted that the PIB could compel administrative statements from officers under investigation while a criminal investigation or court proceeding is pending," the court's opinion reads. "The NOPD simply chooses not to, by adding something to the statute that does not exist, thereby excusing its failure to comply with (the law)."
source- nola.com