SACRAMENTO – On April 4, 2025, California Statewide Law Enforcement Association (CSLEA) Chief Counsel Kasey Clark and Supervising Legal Counsel David De La Riva, along with CSLEA’s State Parks Peace Officers Association of California (SPPOAC) affiliate president, Matt Yarbrough met with Parks and Recreation Law Enforcement management staff including Alex Luscutoff and Evan Walter. The subject matter concerned the application of Parks’ policy related to responding to calls involving potential 5150 commitments and transporting those individuals while in handcuffs in light of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in the Scott v. Smith case (109 F.4th, 1215). In that case, the Court determined in part that peace officers in Las Vegas who responded to a call from a mentally ill person who was hallucinating at the time of the call used excessive force against the individual when they handcuffed Mr. Scott and applied force on the back and neck of Mr. Scott while in a prone position for one to two minutes. The Court concluded despite the struggle put up by Mr. Scott during and after the cuffing, Mr. Scott was not suspected of a crime and posed little to no danger. Mr. Scott died from asphyxiation at the scene.
The primary issues discussed during the meeting included whether SPPOs are required to respond to calls involving persons who may qualify for a 5150 commitment. Also, the extent to which the handcuffing of a mentally ill individual while being transported in a Parks police vehicle (which is required under Parks’ Lexipol policy) places officers in a position of severe vulnerability because such a move could ultimately be interpreted as using excessive force when the individual poses no danger to others. The use of excessive force could affect an officer’s qualified immunity entitlement.
In response, it was made clear by Parks that an officer responding to a call involving a person who may qualify for a 5150 commitment does not necessarily have to make contact with the subject of the call so long as the responding officer can articulate in his or her report all of the variables present explaining the lack of harm posed by the subject. Options available to the officer may include ensuring passers-by are cleared from the area in an attempt to de-escalate matters. The meeting included a discussion on whether it is possible for LEESD to craft a policy which would cover all possible scenarios officers may face in the field. Parks responded in part that management could not commit to a one-size fits all policy. Regardless, CSLEA voiced its concerns which included a suggestion that any policy changes should mirror what the law says in an attempt to clarify what is expected of SPPOs.
The parties agreed they would continue to make and accept recommendations to refine policy in the upcoming weeks.
