On January 27, 2010, at 12:08 a.m., the Police Department responded to 9th and J Street regarding a subject who brandished a gun. During the course of the investigation, officers discovered that the suspect was the off-duty Sacramento police officer. The Police Department immediately launched a concurrent criminal and administrative investigation and placed the deputy on administrative leave.

The completed criminal investigation was sent to the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office for review, a warrant was issued, and the officer was arrested for brandishing a firearm. The officer later pled guilty to disturbing the peace.

During the course of the investigation, discrepancies were discovered in several DUI reports authored by the officer. An ongoing joint investigation by the Sacramento Police Department and the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office was immediately launched into allegations of filing a false police report.

The Sacramento Police Department holds its officers to the highest standards on and off-duty. Incidents of this nature are not reflective of the dedicated officers that serve our community every day.

Source

Tyreke Evans was suspended one game by the league after his reckless driving incident this summer in Sacramento.

That was one of three fines handed down by the league Friday.

Indiana’s Brandon Rush was suspended five games for violations of the league’s drug policy. To earn a suspension you have to have failed a test three times (the first two lead to counseling).

Kenny Hasbrouck of the Miami Heat was suspended two games after pleading guilty to a DUI. This happened in New York before he signed with the Heat.

One could argue that driving under the influence is a bigger risk to society than doing drugs, but these are pretty much the standard NBA suspensions for these kind of violations.

Source

The wreck occurred shortly before 4 a.m. along Interstate 80 near Watt Avenue.

Authorities said the Dodge truck was speeding at up to 100 mph at the time of the crash. The pickup hit the minivan and flipped over.

Three adults and two children in the minivan were taken to a local hospital for treatment of moderate injuries.

Witnesses told the CHP that the man driving the pickup appeared to be intoxicated.

Source

The officer, who has been on administrative leave since January for brandishing a gun during an off-duty incident, has been with the Sacramento Police Department for three years. He was assigned to DUI enforcement in October 2009.

In one of the two cases,  the officer wrote he pulled over a silver car on 16th Street in downtown Sacramento on Jan. 9, 2010, for a broken license plate light. The officer wrote the 24-year-old driver appeared intoxicated, failed a field alcohol screening test and was uncooperative. Jan. 9, 2010 DUI arrest documents

The attorney for Alem Kajmic says the patrol car video shows Kajmic was cooperative.  Alan Donato also says the video clearly shows the officer did not perform a test he claimed to have administered.

“As you can see, he never explains to him, follow my finger. He never admonished him. he never did the test at all,” Donato said .

The second case involved a woman, then 21, who was pulled over last November near the intersection of L and 15th streets in Sacramento.  The officer’s police report claims the woman failed five field sobriety tests including counting and balance tests.

The woman’s attorney, Mark Sollitt provided the police report and video.  He says the video shows otherwise.

“The report says her speech was slow and thick.  You can see her speech pattern is completely normal,” said Sollitt. (The woman, who did not want to be identified, is recognizable in the video so News10 is not showing it.).

The district attorney’s office would not say how many of the officer’s arrest reports were being checked.

Source

The victim’s aunt, said she was overcome with emotion when she saw 22-year-old defendant in court to render a plea for gross vehicular manslaughter and driving under the influence.

“Two lives, they were just beginning,” she said, crying.

The suspect pleaded not guilty to the crash that killed the victim and her eight-month-old baby , which enraged the victim’s family.

“Not guilty? Be a man and confess what you did,” the victim’s aunt said.

Investigators said the victim’s car was stopped at a red light when the suspect, driving drunk, slammed into the back of it.

The babe was killed instantly and the mother died at the scene.

The suspect could face up to 10 years on just one count of vehicular manslaughter. Her’s attorney issued a brief statement offering condolences for the victims’ family.

Funeral services for the two victims have been scheduled for Saturday.

Source

Yesterday’s radar detector is today’s iPhone, but no app can help you once you’ve been caught. There is a technology that hails from before the Internet era that has resurfaced in discussion circles surrounding DUIs because of a new pilot program (AB 91) that went into effect in four California counties on July 1. Welcome the ignition interlock device.

The law, which was introduced by Assemblyman Mike Feuer, impacts drivers in Los Angeles, Alameda, Sacramento and Tulare counties and will remain in effect until 2015. “The four counties were chosen to provide a good representative sample of the state’s geography and population,” said Arianna Smith, a spokeswoman for Feuer.

This law notably places a blanket mandate on all first-time DUI offenders to install an interlock ignition device (IID) in their vehicles. This is a dramatic shift from the current statewide law that only mandates the installation of an IID to drivers convicted of both a DUI and driving with a suspended license. Essentially, it’s one strike and you’re out.

“The device is directly wired into the ignition system, preventing a car from starting without submitting a breath sample,” said Sean Cooke with Interlock Service Specialist.

The driver will need a blood-alcohol level of 0.03% or lower before the engine will start. While the vehicle is in motion, the driver is required to submit another sample 5 to 10 minutes after the ignition is turned on and then at random 20 to 40 minute intervals thereafter, depending on the IID manufacturer. If the driver fails to submit a sample while driving, the device records a failure to comply. After several refusals, the horn starts blaring (and in some cases, vehicle lights start flashing) to attract the attention of law enforcement.

Talk about being caught with your pants down.

What if you took a few breath freshener drops before starting your car?

“We have heard of people not being able to submit clear samples from the use of mouth wash,” said Cooke. But most devices allow the driver several attempts to submit a valid sample before recording a full-blown violation.

Though the passage of the bill was unanimous, it does have its detractors.

“There’s no reason to mandate IID devices to first offenders,” said Josh Dale, executive director of the California DUI Lawyers Assn. “The law will have no effect on recidivism. Going through the system as it stands cures two-thirds of drunk drivers. It’s an extra punishment being done in the form of an experiment.”

There is data to back Dale’s view. In 2004, the DMV released a study discussing the effectiveness of IIDs, and although subsequent DUI incidents of repeat offenders with an IID installed dropped significantly, the study showed no significant effect in preventing a subsequent DUI for first-time DUI offenders. Perhaps the focus regarding IIDs should shift back to repeat offenders, as court-mandated installations of IIDs actually became more lax in 1999 (AB 762) when a law addendum made IIDs mandatory only for repeat DUI offenders who were driving with a suspended license.

We will find out in five years whether AB 91 will lower the 30% recidivism rate in first-time DUI offenders. In 2006, only 1% of these offenders were mandated to have the device installed, so there is very little data regarding the efficacy of such restrictions to this specific group.

Source

The Sacramento Police say the suspect was speeding when he hit 23-year-old the victim and her eight-month-old son Joshua at the intersection of Orange Avenue and Stockton Boulevard in South Sacramento on Sunday.

Investigators arrested Her on charges of driving under the influence and vehicular manslaughter. He is being held on $250,000 bond.

Source

The California Highway Patrol responded to a report of a car accident at Stockton Blvd. and Orange Ave. at 4:25 a.m.

According to CHP, a 22-year-old man was driving a Toyota 4Runner northbound on Stockton Blvd. at Orange Ave. when he rear ended a Honda Accord that was stopped at a red light. The impact from the crash killed both a 23-year-old mother and her 9-month-old baby boy that were inside the Accord. Both the mother and her son had seatbelts on. Because of the high rate of speed both vehicles propelled through the intersection and across two lanes of traffic, turning the vehicles 180 degrees. Both cars were entangled and sustained major damage.

Her was arrested for DUI and 2 counts of vehicular manslaughter. More charges could be pending.

Source

The deputy is under investigation for allegedly falsifying reports in at least two DUI cases. Those cases have been dismissed by the Sacramento County district attorney, and the suspect’s other arrests are now being investigated.

Josh Houlton watched the patrol car camera video of his Christmas Eve stop and arrest in the offices of his attorney Philip McCarthy Tuesday afternoon.

” The officer testified that he paced my client for three blocks on Capitol Avenue at 50 miles per hour,” said McCarthy. “I asked what he meant by pacing. He said that meant he was two-car lengths behind my client for three blocks at 50 miles per hour. Clearly the tape shows that he’s nowhere near two-car lengths behind my client.”

McCarthy says he found several discrepancies between the video and the written police report.

“He said there was no one else in the car, no other witnesses, but clearly on the tape you see the officer as he speaks to the three other fellows in the car and he asks them to exit the vehicle,” McCarthy said.

Chemical tests later revealed Houlton’s blood alcohol was .10. which is above the legal limit of .08.

Still, McCarthy calls the credibility of the officer into question.

“Whether my client was under the influence or not, if there was an improper stop and arrest in the case, the case should be thrown out,” he said.

Source

Prosecutors dismissed those two cases in June and now are reviewing every case in which Officer Brandon Mullock was the arresting officer, authorities confirmed.

Already, officials have found other cases in which Mullock’s written arrest reports differ substantially from events captured by his patrol cruiser’s in-car video camera, which was the problem in the two dismissed cases, said Karen Maxwell, assistant chief deputy district attorney. She declined to say in how many cases such discrepancies had been found.

Mullock, a 25-year-old who’s been with the department for three years, was most recently assigned to the DUI enforcement team. He has been on paid administrative leave since January, when police alleged that he brandished a gun in an off-duty fracas.

In June, Mullock pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor count of using offensive words in public in connection with the downtown Sacramento incident. According to the police account of the exchange, Mullock used a racial epithet and an obscenity.

He was sentenced to 180 hours of community service and three years of informal probation, which prohibits him from drinking alcohol and requires counseling for alcohol abuse, according to Superior Court records.

An internal department investigation ended with Mullock’s plea, said spokesman Sgt. Norm Leong.

However, a new internal review began after the District Attorney’s Office raised concerns about the two DUI cases, Leong said.

“We take the allegations of improper reporting very seriously,” Leong said. “Once a thorough and complete investigation is complete, rest assured appropriate action will be taken.”

Mullock declined to speak to The Bee. His attorney, Daniel McNamara, did not return a phone call or e-mail seeking comment.

On July 16, District Attorney Jan Scully and Maxwell co-signed letters to the public defender’s and conflict criminal defenders’ offices alerting them to the investigation.

The Sacramento Superior Court appoints conflict criminal defenders in cases in which public defenders cannot provide representation because of a conflict of interest or insufficient staff.

In the two dismissed cases – involving arrests in November and January – Mullock’s written accounts are “significantly and materially different from the actual events as revealed in the videos,” Scully and Maxwell wrote.

In addition to reviewing Mullock’s past arrests, they’ve asked prosecutors in their office to alert them of cases in which Mullock was a witness, according to the letters.

“In any case in which he is a material witness, or his conduct may be material, this office will take such steps as may be necessary to fulfill our obligations to the court and the defense,” Scully and Maxwell wrote. “This may include declining to file a case, dismissing a case, or disclosing to the defense the facts surrounding Officer Mullock’s conduct which the defense may then offer in court.”

On Friday, Maxwell said Mullock could face criminal charges as a result of the monthlong review, which could last several more weeks.

She described the allegations as serious and “very uncommon, considering the thousands and thousands of (law enforcement) reports we get each year.”

In the Nov. 14 incident, Mullock stopped a then-21-year-old woman in downtown, according to court records, the police report and the woman’s attorney, Mark Sollitt.

Sollitt provided The Bee with the police report and the in-car camera video.

In the report, Mullock wrote that the woman failed five field sobriety tests, including reciting the alphabet, missing numbers in a counting test, and swaying and hopping during a one-leg standing test.

He also wrote that her speech was slow and thick.

However, in the video – which includes audio from a microphone worn by Mullock – the woman’s speech is clear and normally paced. And she is shown doing only four tests, three of which she appears to pass without skipping letters or numbers or struggling to keep her balance.

Two “preliminary alcohol screening” tests measured her blood-alcohol level at .11 and .12, according to the report. However, Sollitt argues that the test was illegally given because Mullock did not advise the woman that the test is not required by law for anyone 21 or older and not on probation. (A blood-alcohol reading of .08 or greater means you are driving under the influence of alcohol in California.)

On the video, he is heard saying only, “You don’t have to.”

In the Jan. 9 incident, Mullock pulled over a 24-year-old man in downtown, according to court records and the man’s lawyer, Alan Donato.

Donato said he became concerned while explaining the police report to his client.

“His reaction to it was of complete surprise, which is strange – truly,” Donato said. “Usually, (DUI clients) take issue with a certain part of the report, but he was saying, ‘That’s just flat-out wrong. … He’s just lying.’ ”

According to Donato, Mullock wrote that his client failed a test the video shows never happened. The lawyer also said Mullock improperly administered a preliminary alcohol screening, then lied about it in the report.

“Another complete falsehood was the fact that he said my client was being combative and uncooperative and … pretending he didn’t speak English,” he said. “That just didn’t happen.”

As part of the department’s internal investigation, Leong said officials will look at Mullock’s arrests since he joined the DUI team in October.

He declined to say how many cases that would entail. However, at the time of the Nov. 14 report, Mullock wrote that his career DUI arrests were “no fewer than 35.”

In addition to DUI enforcement training in the academy, Leong said the Sacramento Police Department offers optional 10-hour and 24-hour refresher sessions.

To join the DUI team, officers must be interviewed and approved by supervisors, Leong said.

Mullock was still on the enforcement team when he was put on administrative leave in January, Leong said.

Source