L.A. Sheriff Luna sues oversight commission over deputy misconduct subpoenas
Sheriff Robert Luna sued the county's Civilian Oversight Commission this week, asking a court to decide whether the department should comply with the commission's subpoenas requesting information about deputy misconduct and uses of force.
Filed in L.A. County Superior Court, the suit comes after the oversight commission issued subpoenas demanding records relating to three controversial cases in which deputies beat or shot young men. Some of the deputies involved have been fired, barred from being sworn police officers or pleaded guilty to federal crimes.
The department's response to the subpoenas is due Thursday morning, but the lawsuit filed earlier this week said Luna was unsure whether state laws that keep most police personnel records secret would conflict with legal requirements to obey the commission's subpoena.
Read more: Ex-deputy accused of punching Palmdale mother holding baby sues county for firing him
'The Sheriff's Department is committed to transparency in law enforcement and has worked diligently to partner with the COC,' the department told The Times in an emailed statement. 'This complaint is not intended to cause division between county departments, but rather to gain clear guidance on the complex legal issues surrounding what can and cannot be disclosed to the COC moving forward. Without judicial clarification on this long-running disagreement, the Department risks potential criminal charges, civil liability, and erosion of public trust.'
Robert Bonner, the former federal judge who chairs the oversight commission, saw it differently.
'We regret that the Sheriff believes it necessary to sue the Civilian Oversight Commission — the Commission charged with oversight of his department — to seek guidance from the courts,' he told The Times. 'We find it curious that the Sheriff chose to do this on the eve of his obligation to respond to three commission subpoenas which seek to compel him and his department to provide reports of use of force against citizens to the commission.'
In early 2020, the Board of Supervisors gave the commission the ability to direct the Office of Inspector General to issue subpoenas. Two months later, amid a series of Sheriff's Department scandals, Los Angeles voters overwhelmingly approved Measure R, giving the commission power to directly subpoena witnesses and records. A few months after that, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law granting subpoena power to oversight bodies statewide.
Over the past few years, the oversight commission has typically requested documents — including those relating to jail deaths, deputy gangs and sexual misconduct — through public records laws. The Sheriff's Department has turned over records in response to some commission requests, but has resisted others, saying the records in question were confidential. In February, the commission took a stronger approach and issued subpoenas.
Read more: Key L.A. sheriff oversight official resigns, citing interference from county lawyers
One of the subpoenas asks for all investigative materials relating to the killing of Andres Guardado, an 18-year-old who was killed in 2020 by deputies who shot him in the back after a brief foot chase. Both of the deputies involved were later sentenced to federal prison for an unrelated incident in which they admitted to kidnapping and abusing a skateboarder after he yelled at them to stop picking on teens in a Compton park.
Another subpoena sought records in the case of Emmett Brock, a transgender man who was beaten by a Norwalk deputy outside a 7-Eleven in 2023. The incident was caught on camera, and last year Deputy Joseph Benza pleaded guilty to a federal civil rights violation for using excessive force.
At least eight other deputies were relieved of duty after Benza made several damning allegations in his plea agreement, including claims that numerous other deputies and sergeants had helped cover up his misconduct.
The third subpoena seeks records in connection with the case of Joseph Perez, who was beaten by Industry station sheriff's deputies in 2020. The department deemed the use of force to be within policy, though Perez disputes that and has since filed suit. The case is still pending.
Each of the three subpoenas signed by Bonner includes an all-caps warning: 'DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAY BE PUNISHED AS CONTEMPT BY A COURT. YOU WILL ALSO BE LIABLE FOR THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ALL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM YOUR FAILURE TO OBEY.'
The department says some of the records oversight officials have asked for are secret under a state law that makes most kinds of deputy personnel records confidential.
That law, section 832.7 of the California Penal Code, has some exceptions so prosecutors, state oversight officials and grand juries can see confidential records as needed during investigations. But the Sheriff's Department says the law doesn't specifically say that Civilian Oversight Commissions are allowed to see those records, and that a court needed to clarify so sheriff's officials are not held criminally liable for complying.
This isn't the first time the commission's subpoena powers have been met with resistance from the Sheriff's Department. In 2020, when the commission subpoenaed the former sheriff, Alex Villanueva, about his response to COVID-19 in the jail, Villanueva questioned the legality of that move. The dispute ended up in court, and ultimately Villanueva agreed to answer the commission's questions voluntarily.
When oversight officials issued more subpoenas, Villanueva resisted those as well, resulting in multiple court cases. One of those cases nearly led to a contempt hearing in 2022, but the court called it off after Villanueva's lawyers asked a higher court to step in.
In late 2023, after he was no longer sheriff, Villanueva finally agreed to testify under oath and answer questions about alleged deputy gangs operating within the department.
In the lawsuit filed this week, the Sheriff's Department tried to distance itself from Villanueva's approach, saying it was taking a 'markedly different approach' from the prior administration, which 'actively resisted COC oversight efforts, requiring the COC at times to seek court intervention to force LASD to comply with requests.'
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Fury at immigration raids, boots on the ground, and a political dogfight: What to know about LA protests
Donald Trump has authorized the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles after an immigration crackdown erupted into mass protests on Saturday. The first troops arrived on Sunday morning, with around 300 being dispersed over three locations in Greater Los Angeles. Footage has shown protesters throwing rocks at law enforcement vehicles and others trying to get in the way of a Marshals Service bus after more than a hundred arrests were made. On Sunday the violence continued, with state authorities urging calm and blasting the president for the 'unnecessary' action that was designed to create 'chaos' and 'a spectacle.' Here, the Independent breaks down what you need to know about the unrest in LA. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers conducted search warrants at multiple locations on Friday. One search was executed outside a clothing warehouse in the Fashion District, after a judge found probable cause that the employer was using fictitious documents for some of its workers, according to representatives for Homeland Security Investigations and the US Attorney's Office. Crowds tried to stop ICE agents from driving away following the arrests. Another protest was sparked outside a federal building in downtown LA, after demonstrators discovered detainees were allegedly being held in the basement of the building. Protests then erupted in Paramount, LA, after it appeared federal law enforcement officers were conducting another immigration operation in the area. The protests also spread to the nearby city of Compton. LA County Sheriff Robert Luna stated that as many as 400 people were involved in the demonstration. The ICE operations in Los Angeles resulted in the arrests of 118 immigrants this week, including 44 people in Friday's operations, according to the Department of Homeland Security. The arrests led to protesters gathering outside a federal detention center, chanting, "Set them free, let them stay!" On Saturday, Trump ordered the deployment of at least 2,000 National Guard troops to LA. "If Governor Gavin Newscum, of California, and Mayor Karen Bass, of Los Angeles, can't do their jobs, which everyone knows they can't, then the Federal Government will step in and solve the problem, RIOTS & LOOTERS, the way it should be solved!!!' he wrote on his Truth Social platform on Saturday. California Governor Gavin Newsom also wrote on social media that the "federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers. That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' He added deployment is "the wrong mission and will erode public trust." The state National Guard has not been federalized by a president, overriding a governor, since 1965. On Sunday the first national guard troops arrived in areas of Los Angeles, including in Paramount – but also in the downtown area. According to the U.S. Northern Command, 300 troops had been dispersed over three locations in the Greater Los Angeles Area. Footage shared online showed an escalation in the clashes between demonstrators and law enforcement with police in riot gear using tear gas to disperse people. Other video showed protesters throwing fireworks and other projectiles at officers. Vehicles have been set on fire and graffiti reading 'f*** ICE' has been sprayed in multiple locations. By late Sunday morning the LAPD had already made 29 arrests, with law enforcement braced for 'several more protests' in the city throughout the day. A police source told CBS that city officials "are supportive of immigrant rights" and described the current situation a "no win" for law enforcement. Meanwhile a spokesperson for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department told The Independent that just two arrests had been made in the city of Paramount on Saturday. The city's Democratic representative Nanette Barragán told CNN's State of the Union that she is being told to prepare for "30 days of ICE enforcement.' Over on the east coast around 20 anti-ICE protesters were also led away by police in New York, following demonstrations in lower Manhattan. ABC7 reported that dozens of protesters were out for hours at Federal Plaza on Sunday, calling out concerns about ICE detainments. Earlier on Sunday, Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino confirmed arrests had been made in New York as well as Los Angeles, warning protesters to 'choose wisely.' Newsom and Bass have both continued to speak out against the president's decision to deploy the troops, describing it as 'unnecessary' and an attempt by the administration to create 'chaos.' In a statement put out via email the governor said that Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth 'want a spectacle' and violence. 'We have been working closely with law enforcement. There is no unmet need. The President is attempting to inflame passions and provoke a response,' he wrote. 'He would like nothing more than for this provocative show of force -- and Pete Hegseth's absurd threat to deploy United States Marines on American soil – to escalate tensions and incite violence. 'They want a spectacle. They want the violence. They think this is good for them politically.' Newsom added: 'This is not the way a civilized country behaves. It is completely deranged behavior. Don't give them the spectacle they want. Never use violence. Speak out peacefully and in large numbers.' Speaking to KTLA on Sunday, Bass said that Trump's decision was unnecessary and 'just political.' 'I'm very disappointed. To me, this is just completely unnecessary, and I think it's the [Trump] administration just posturing.' Other Democrats including Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and New Jersey Senator Corey Booker backed Newsom and Bass, with Booker describing the president's actions as 'hypocritical at best.' Members of the Trump administration and GOP, including FBI Director Kash Patel, Speaker Mike Johnson and Homeland Security Secretary Krist Noem, rallied around the president.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
California man arrested on child porn allegations sues county after charges dropped
A man arrested last year on allegations of child pornography has filed a lawsuit against San Bernardino County, accusing authorities of uprooting his life, damaging his reputation and potentially targeting him over his sexuality. Nicholas Diaz was arrested last November after his home in Grand Terrace was raided by authorities. Diaz was a longtime foster parent, and as a result of the raid and ensuing charges, lost custody of one of his two adopted children. But the attorneys representing Diaz say those charges were eventually dropped, and his arrest was the result of, at best, misidentification, or, at worst, deliberate targeting of a single gay parent. According to Ontario-based McCune Law Group, Diaz became the subject of a law enforcement investigation after the discovery of his OnlyFans account, an online subscription service typically used for homemade production of adult content. Authorities viewing this account allegedly found a video that they believed featured a minor—an allegation that Diaz's attorneys say was not true, and not sufficient probable cause to warrant a raid at his home and charges. In reality, the lawsuit states, the person depicted in the video was a 'consenting adult male in his 30s.' The lawsuit alleges that warrants were drafted for his arrest through a process of shoddy or biased detective work, ultimately leading to Diaz being taken into custody at his workplace, 'causing him public humiliation and embarrassment in front of his colleagues.' He was eventually taken to his home, where authorities began an extensive search. 'Mr. Diaz offered to voluntarily provide the Sheriff's Department with any information to clear up what he knew was a mistake,' the suit reads. His attorneys also allege that Diaz informed authorities that his children were inside, and that he had requested the 'opportunity to reassure' them. That request was denied, they said, and deputies approached with guns drawn and forcibly entered the home. Diaz's attorneys claim one of his sons was pinned down on his stomach by several law enforcement officers, and had his diabetes monitoring device 'ripped out of the pump, causing the child to go into diabetic shock after he was placed in handcuffs.' The raid, and the detaining of one son, happened in front of Diaz's second adopted son. He was also eventually handcuffed and taken outside alongside his brother, where they were 'made to sit on the curb, exposed to their neighbors.' At the time of his arrest, the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department said no foster children were at home at the time of the search; there was no mention of Diaz's adopted children. Diaz was eventually booked into jail and held on $80,000 bail, while his photo was disseminated to the public and local media, including KTLA, after authorities stated there may be additional victims who've yet to come forward. The release of his name and photo led to Diaz losing his job, as well as receiving threats of violence against his family, his attorneys said. Diaz also lost custody of his youngest son and was granted only limited visitation rights. The charges were eventually dropped, and last month, three separate claims were filed against San Bernardino County on behalf of him and his two adopted sons. The lawsuits allege physical injury to one of the sons, emotional trauma caused by the raid and the arrest, as well as significant and irreparable damage to Diaz's reputation, career and the family's overall well-being. 'Mr. Diaz's case tells the story of a loving father, gay man, and proud member of the San Bernardino community, who found himself arrested and publicly humiliated for crimes he did not commit,' McCune Law Group wrote in a statement provided to KTLA. 'Mr. Diaz saw his family torn apart by false and biased accusations. His children were physically and mentally harmed by the raid, and by the pain of ongoing separation from their parent. They are owed peace of mind.' But his attorneys say that peace of mind can't be obtained without setting the record straight. 'To protect this family, it is crucial that we tell their true story,' the statement concludes. KTLA has reached out for comment from San Bernardino County and the District Attorney's Office. The D.A.'s Office did not respond to a request for clarification regarding charges against Diaz; a County spokesperson said it would not be appropriate to comment on the ongoing legal matter. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Miami Herald
2 days ago
- Miami Herald
Elon and Trump: Lots of losers in the spat to end all spats
Editor's note: Welcome to a special edition of Double Take, a regular conversation from opinion writers Melinda Henneberger and David Mastio tackling news with differing perspectives. DAVID: Who could have imagined that a truth-challenged, philandering grifter and a drug-addled billionaire wannabe Mars colonist would find it difficult to get along while sharing the presidential limelight? It is hard to see where Donald Trump and Elon Musk ever aligned much on anything. One wants to build a base on the moon while the other wants to sell Luna to the Saudis. One builds electric cars while the other wants to send them to the landfill. One sold out to China and the other is still trying to sell out to China. More seriously, I think Musk came to Washington genuinely thinking that he could change the place, turning deficits into surpluses with hard-nosed, start-up management principles. That was never going to work out. MELINDA: When two liars break up, who do you believe? Despite the headlines about their 'remarkable' split, the single remarkable thing about it is that it took so long. There is only room for one diva in any relationship. Musk is right that he got Trump elected and Trump is right that he did a lot for Musk in return, so the partnership, such as it was, served both of their financial interests, and who should complain? Oh, I know the answer: every one of us. Now they want to tell on each other. Which is delightful and all, but I'm kind of surprised that Elon started by telling us that the reason we haven't gotten to see the Epstein files is that Trump is in there. I mean, that's been rumored for years, but how quaint that Musk thinks that after all we already know about Trump, anything that he might have done with underage girls would change any minds. Wouldn't his supporters just say that he didn't do it, or if he did do it, others have, too, and besides, David and Bathsheba? I was with you right up until you said that Musk came to Washington to turn deficits into surpluses. Trump posted in pique — redundant, I know, because when else does he say anything — that the 'easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts. I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it.' Kind of a damning admission about how unserious they both were about going after waste, fraud and abuse. DAVID: I think there was some element of self-enrichment from Musk. Trump claimed Musk went 'crazy' over losing electric vehicle subsidies, but Musk has long said he doesn't care about EV subsidies.. He repeated that in December. They're a competitive disadvantage to Tesla which is really the incumbent electric car maker with competitors propped up by the subsidies though now Republican sources are saying he changed his position again. He does care about other subsidies though. Musk has always appeared to be for tax credits for solar power that help another of his companies.. MELINDA: What makes you believe that Musk was in Washington to impose order, when what he actually did was run around causing personal, national and global chaos, just like his boss? I'm sorry/not at all sorry for perseverating on the dead kids in Africa as a result of the shuttering of USAID, but since those shameful cuts were not really even some big money saver, what again was the point? The Washington Post had a story Thursday about how, since then, our government has decided it will probably destroy $12 million worth of HIV-prevention medications and contraceptives it had already bought for developing countries. It's going to waste in warehouses in Belgium and Dubai, and we'd rather trash these supplies than give them away, even though it will cost more to do that. Please name some concrete examples of Musk's application of hard-nosed startup management principles, because all I saw was ruin without reason. DAVID: In a startup when something is not working, there's more urgency than with a big profitable company. One approach entrepreneurs take to rescuing a floundering startup is to break down the failing parts to the studs before you rebuild. Musk was busily doing in the federal government what he had done at Twitter/X and elsewhere. Probably the funniest moment in this epic divorce so far is when Trump threatened to take Musk's SpaceX contracts away and Musk replied that he'll shut down the Dragon spacecraft manned and cargo version that NASA needs so badly for the International Space Station. The two spoiled brats are both threatening to take their ball and go home. If only. MELINDA: Wait a minute, now Musk is a spoiled brat, too? A few days ago you liked him bigly, so I'm glad to see you coming around. DAVID: I still like him bigly. The guy is still a visionary who is changing the world. One reason I still like him is that the beginning of the falling out was when Musk told the truth about Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill. It really is a 'disgusting abomination.' And if there is anything that Trump cannot abide anywhere near him is a truth-teller who might commit accuracy again. MELINDA: I don't know why you keep calling him a truth-teller when you know he's encouraged this nonsense about the nonexistent genocide in South Africa. Not much accuracy there. He is, however, telling the truth about some things now that he's angry, for example about how tariffs will cause a recession by the end of the year. DAVID: I fear you're right about the recession. Trump truly has gone off the deep end. If he thinks he can run the country without his big money backers and truly change America, he's kidding himself. The split with Musk is actually the second big split in the Trump coalition in two weeks. Last week, Trump called the architect of the Federalist Society takeover of the judiciary, Leonard Leo, a 'sleazebag.' Leo is the one who gave Trump his list of Supreme Court justices whooverturned Roe and defined Trump's first term. And Leo is sitting on a billion-dollar investment fund dedicated to right-leaning political activism. If Trump alienates all the big money in the Republican Party, he is going to have to spend his own to keep control of Congress in the upcoming midterms, elections that any reasonable observer will see as a potential blowout giving power to the Democrats in the House and the Senate. If the election is during or after a recession, all bets are off. MELINDA: He can finally afford to break up with the big money, but I also think he'll find some new Elon to fund him, hop around swearing fealty and then wind up bitter and telling tales. And are we sure that Trump is even the one who initiated the break with Leonard Leo? I keep thinking about how Trump once told Howard Stern that whenever someone breaks up with you, you always say that you were the one who ended it. What I personally want out to see come of this drama is to never hear the word 'bromance' again. DAVID: The political fallout isn't all there is. This matters for business, too. On Thursday, Tesla stock lost tens of billions of dollars in value. While Truth Social didn't go down as much, Trump has less to start with and a $100 million cut to his net worth is a blow. If Democrats won't buy Teslas because of the DOGE cuts you say were so deadly, and Republicans won't buy Teslas because Musk was disloyal to Trump and blew up the tax cut bill, where does that leave Tesla's thousands of workers and the dozens of companies that are suppliers to the car company? Americans of all kinds will find that out when the Big Beautiful bill goes down in flames and taxes go up as is scheduled when Trump's 2017 tax cuts expire. Even people with relatively modest incomes will get hit with big bills. When elephants fight, it is the little people who get trampled. MELINDA: We agree that the bill is a 'disgusting abomination,' though not for the same reasons, and let's talk more soon about who will get trampled if it doesn't pass.
