Indy Police-Oath Case Going To State Supreme Court

**Pudge** · 10-17-07, 05:28 PM

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/14353686/detail.html

INDIANAPOLIS -- The Indiana Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case questioning whether all officers in the new Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department should have taken an oath -- a case that could affect thousands of arrests made this year.

The case involves the arrest of Cheryl Oddi-Smith on a drunken driving charge. A Marion County judge in August dismissed the charge, ruling that the arresting officer's authority under the old Indianapolis Police Department didn't automatically transfer when the IPD and the county sheriff's department merged to become IMPD in January.

The officer, Judge Reuben Hill ruled, should have sworn an oath for the new department but did not.

IMPD held a swearing-in ceremony at the beginning of the year, but more than 80 percent of the new department's officers did not participate. Since then, new recruits have taken an oath for IMPD.

Prosecutors appealed Hill's ruling. The Indiana Supreme Court decided to handle the case directly instead of letting it go to an appeals court first.

If the court decides to uphold the charge dismissal, the decision could have implications for other arrests made by officers who didn't take an oath for the IMPD.

The Indiana Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for Nov. 14.

PeterJasonMN · 10-17-07, 05:34 PM

What a bunch of horseshit.

**TheeBadOne** · 10-17-07, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by PeterJasonMN

What a bunch of horseshit.

And I thought our state was f-ed up on somethings...

**armsmaster270** · 10-17-07, 07:40 PM

WTF The old oath should still be valid even with the change.

**Willowdared** · 10-17-07, 07:53 PM

They don't get their peace powers from the state?

**MacLean** · 10-17-07, 08:41 PM

Municipal police officers typically don't derive their authority from a State, only Sheriff's and Deputies. That would *seem* to apply to a Metro PD.

In most States, the powers of municipal officers are extended by code but are derived from charters.

**lewisipso** · 10-17-07, 08:46 PM

The oath I have taken.
I do solemnly swear that i will support the constitution and laws of the United States and the constitution and laws of the State of Louisiana and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties imcumbent upon me as a Deputy Sheriff/Police Officer, according to the best of my ability and understanding.

Now I've taken that oath several times but never to a department. That sounds strange. And I would think that oath would cover me no matter where I went.

PeterJasonMN · 10-17-07, 11:43 PM

Originally Posted by TheeBadOne

And I thought our state was f-ed up on somethings...

Hizzoner Justice Page is probably licking his chops at using this one.

**Five-0** · 10-18-07, 12:17 AM

Some judges today are damn retarded. I've already said in another thread the justice sys is for and by the criminals. Good people will continue to be the victims.

**Wolven** · 10-18-07, 08:16 AM

Never mind that the woman was driving drunk and a danger to herself and everyone else on the road...let's just think of something/anything to use to try and get her off as they probably do not have anything else. Unbelievable...when will the stupidity end?

**Willowdared** · 10-18-07, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by maclean

Municipal police officers typically don't derive their authority from a State, only Sheriff's and Deputies. That would *seem* to apply to a Metro PD.

In most States, the powers of municipal officers are extended by code but are derived from charters.

Hmmmm, if you are sworn in California, you have to be POST certified, no matter what agency you work for, even if you are school police. My understanding was, if you are employed by an agency, you have full peace powers.

Maybe Jato can explain how it works?

**PapaBear** · 10-18-07, 11:31 AM

Same city, same County, same department, different name. So, what the heck is the problem. There was no change in employment status. Must be a reject judge from the 9th Circus Court of Adjustment.

**Motorwaycop** · 10-18-07, 03:41 PM

One of our old hands decided to stay on past his thirty years.
Because he retired it meant that he had to be sworn in again, even though there was only 12 hrs between his shifts.
Trouble was there was no slot in the court as no new recruits were around. Soit would be over a month before he could patrol again as he would technically have no authority.
He was told he had to pay for himself and arrange it with the court if he wanted it done sooner!
This was what the HR dept for my force told him.
Thankfully my unit is regional and a magistrate elswhere was found and the job done in spite of our own force.

**MacLean** · 10-18-07, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by PDawg

Hmmmm, if you are sworn in California, you have to be POST certified, no matter what agency you work for, even if you are school police. My understanding was, if you are employed by an agency, you have full peace powers.

Maybe Jato can explain how it works?

In Washington, you also have to be certified by the CJTC at different levels depending on your position.

However, your powers are not derived from your certification, they are derived from first your state constitution and then from state law and then from city code or charter.

Most State constitutions out west specify the Sheriff as the primary conservator of peace. Cities derive their authority from their charters.

What typically happens is a law passed extending mutual aid powers and so on.

In Washington, it is RCW 10.93.

**Car 4** · 10-18-07, 04:05 PM

What he (maclean) said. In this state, the only commission enumerated in the constitution is that of Sheriff and his/her deputies. The Sheriff in this county is female. The state then passes a law called the Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act which allows other kinds of commissions to be valid around the state. It is confusing to have so many different ways to be empowered around the country.....but I agree that the judge is a putz!!

Car 4

**countybear** · 10-18-07, 05:18 PM

I wonder how many arrests have been made by this agency's officers between the merger and the swearing-in of all possible arresting officers... both felony and misdemeanor. Think of it, all traffic cites, summonses, civil process services, warrant services, and arrests on any magnitude of charge rendered void by a judge's desire to grandstand.

This is a complete abandonment of common sense.

**Pudge** · 10-18-07, 05:26 PM

Originally Posted by countybear

I wonder how many arrests have been made by this agency's officers between the merger and the swearing-in of all possible arresting officers... both felony and misdemeanor. Think of it, all traffic cites, summonses, civil process services, warrant services, and arrests on any magnitude of charge rendered void by a judge's desire to grandstand.

This is a complete abandonment of common sense.

And if it's upheld and they all get tossed, imagine the lawsuits rolling into the city.