Question
I am looking into the reason for the firing of two officers from our local police department. The city confirmed that two officers had been fired during their probationary period but said it is against their policy to release the officers’ names. Can they legally withhold this information? They also declined to discuss the reason for the firing, beyond saying that officers may be let go in their probationary period for failing to meet the department’s standards. Are they required to give any more information than this?
Answer
Unfortunately, the California Legislature and Supreme Court have bent over backward to protect police officers from public accountability.
In Penal Code section 832.7, the California Legislature exempted from public disclosure the personnel records of “peace officers,” which includes local police, and any “information obtained from these records.” Personnel records are defined in section 832.8 to include any “discipline” of an officer or any “complaints, or investigations of complaints, concerning an event or transaction in which he or she participated, or which he or she perceived, and pertaining to the manner in which he or she performed his or her duties.”
The statutes go on, in section 832.7(c), to indicate that the names of officers” against whom a complaint has been filed also cannot be released. The California Supreme Court has held that this also prohibits the release of the name of police officers “at least to the extent it applies to disciplinary matters.” Copley Press, Inc. v. Superior Court, 39 Cal. 4th 1272, 1297-98 (2006). In other circumstances, the officers names must be released, but, apparently, not when it comes to disciplinary proceedings. Although Copley Press case dealt with administrative appeals of disciplinary proceedings involving non-probationary officers., it would probably be hard to argue that its reasoning did not extend to disciplinary proceedings against probationary officers.
However, the Supreme Court last year said that Copley Press did not allow the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (an agency created within the California Department of Justice) to refuse to disclose “the names, employing departments, and hiring and termination dates of California peace officers included in the Commission’s database.” Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training v. Superior Court, 42 Cal. 4th 278, 298-99 (2007). So you might be able to get the names that way, if you know the termination dates.
Asked & Answered posts should not be relied on as legal advice, and FAC makes no guarantees about their completeness or accuracy. All posts carry a date of publication that readers should take note of in assessing their usefulness, given that laws and interpretations of them may change over time. Posts predating Jan. 1, 2023, that discuss the California Public Records Act may contain statute numbers no longer in use. Please see this page for a table showing how the California Public Records Act has been renumbered.