Patterico's Pontifications

1/21/2015

Man Sues California Highway Patrol, But It’s Not What You Think

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:20 am



[guest post by Dana]

In a bit of a twist, instead of law enforcement being accused of harassment or excessive behavior, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) is being sued for failing to arrest a drunk driver. Filing suit is the driver:

Daniel Ray Fernandez has filed a complaint for damages because he claims a CHP officer stopped him for driving in excess of 100 mph on Interstate 5 near Disneyland, impounded his motorcycle, gave him a traffic ticket, and left him on the side of the highway heavily intoxicated, moneyless and without a cell phone.

According to a police report obtained by the Weekly, a home-bound Fernandez–whose blood-alcohol level was an alarming .204–was struck, wounded and knocked unconscious about 30 minutes later by 60 mph traffic while walking on a 22 Freeway ramp near Grand Avenue.

His injuries included a broken left arm, broken left elbow, broken left wrist, broken right ankle as well as lacerations to his head and body.

Jonathan A. Falcioni, the plaintiff’s Riverside-based lawyer, wrote in the lawsuit that the CHP officer knew Fernandez was heavily intoxicated, owed a duty to make an arrest but forced him to try to walk several miles home.

Fernandez’s lawyer holds the officer fully responsible for his client’s damages:

“With knowledge that [Fernandez] was a danger to himself and others, officer D. Howard abandoned him on the side of the road,” Falcioni wrote. “Howard knowingly created this dangerous condition by [sic] subjected him to it.”

–Dana

28 Responses to “Man Sues California Highway Patrol, But It’s Not What You Think”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (8e74ce)

  2. why are cops so unfailingly stupid

    it’s yet another conundrum Mr. Colonel

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  3. Is California some weird land where such claims demanding that the police actually protect people (rather than merely make an effort to apprehend perpetrators afterward) are recognized by the courts? Such claims have been tossed so many times I am amazed that any lawyer would make the effort on contingency and after being advised of the odds I am amazed any plaintiff would shell out the funds either.

    Soronel Haetir (208a1b)

  4. Soronel,

    This case has a good chance of paying off because it is the criminal suing the police, not the victim.

    A Californian.

    mark (f9c745)

  5. So, if Fernandez and his lawyer hit the jackpot, California’s vehicle codes will soon stipulate the CHP (local PDs to follow) react to anyone caught driving drunk with not only a DUI ticket but also with a night in the can, and all for their own protection, don’t ya know. What’s next forfeiture of the vehicle?

    ropelight (e65ab1)

  6. Can’t
    Handle
    Policew*rk

    redc1c4 (34e91b)

  7. I agree, ropelight, that the result would be to implement zero-tolerance knee-jerk policies along the lines you state.

    But, it does seem like the police had a responsibility; I mean, they are so nice and solicitious when they are actually throwing criminals into the back of their cruisers to make sure they don’t bump their noggins on the door frame.

    If it’d been 10-below-freezing, would they have just driven away laughing?

    OTOH, maybe Mr. Fernandez was a disagreeable person and rejected their offer of assistance? There are so many unknowns.

    Pious Agnostic (7eb3b0)

  8. Yes, yes, it does sound like California.

    nk (dbc370)

  9. Excellent BuzzFeedish clickbait headline.

    Second choice: CHP Officer Stops Man for Speeding — And You Won’t Believe What Happens Next!

    🙂

    Patterico (9c670f)

  10. It sounds as if Fernandez was turned into a pedestrian on the Interstate itself…rather a dangerous situation in and of itself. The officer could have at least given him a ride to to the nearest off ramp. Unless as Pious A. suggests he rejected that. Which if he did ought to vitiate the suit. I don’t know local geography. Is the ramp where he was hit part of I5?

    kishnevi (294553)

  11. BTW, how routine in California is the practice of merely issuing a ticket and not actually arresting the perp in DUI.

    kishnevi (a5d1b9)

  12. Clickbait headline? Ugh. And I wasn’t even trying…

    Dana (70f8e7)

  13. Kishnevi @11 Doubt that he was cited and released for DUI, the post doesn’t say. If he had been he usually would have been booked and cited at the Jail or local PD and either released to a responsible adult or sent on his way when sober.

    The whole thing doesn’t sound right. Over 100 is handled as “reckless”. The impounding of the bike leads me to believe he was suspended. CHP missing the .20 B/A is not very realistic, those guys are good at catching that and they are death on DUI. Wonder how long after the stop that the blood was drawn or breath taken and who did it.

    labcatcher (61737c)

  14. If the incident is as described, yeah, the policeman ought to be liable. He left a man as a pedestrian on an interstate highway — which normally have “no pedestrians” signs — in an impaired condition. If anyone else had this gentleman as a passenger, and just kicked him out of the car on the interstate, that person would be legally liable as well.

    You cannot just willfully place a person in danger like that.

    The Dana who supports the police, but doesn't support stupidity (f6a568)

  15. Police cannot be sued for inaction, but they can certainly be sued for incorrect action. The unproven assertion is that the cop knew the plaintiff was incapable of walking off the freeway, but even then leaving a cold sober person on the freeway as a pedestrian isn’t all that defensible either. The cop should have cuffed him, put him in back, and then released him on a surface street in a safe place.

    The facts may be totally different than what the plaintiff states, but as stated, there is certainly a claim to be adjudicated.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  16. I suspect there was a degree of non-cooperation involved.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  17. 14. I agree. Now there may be something left out, like the man refusing a ride. Arresting him might itself be grounds for a law suit.

    He could have tried to make a call for him, or called an ambulance, or the Red Cross, or given him a ride someplace.

    Just leaving him there, alone, drunk, without money or a phone, and not near his home, doesn’t sound right. It might have been safer to let him continue riding his motorcycle, even for cars (cars have after all, gotten into accidents when they hit a deer)

    Sammy Finkelman (e806a6)

  18. What about the AAA?

    Sammy Finkelman (e806a6)

  19. Along the lines of what ropelight said, there are any number of “protections” that result in citation what would not otherwise be made. Want a sobriety checkpoint? You need probable cause. So, find a place to sit where, say, everyone rolls a useless stop sign before they see you. Or the classic broken taillight. You might even end up with dubious DUI arrests where the subsequent test exonerates, just to cover the officer’s ass.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  20. I believe maybe 10% of what this Dindu Nuffin’s lawyer alleges. The injuries. That is, that the injuries exist. Not anything about how they came about including getting hit by a car on a ramp.

    nk (dbc370)

  21. cynical or refreshingly honest? Six things you won’t believe internet commenter Mr. nk got away with saying

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  22. I only count three this morning:
    1. The NFL is a racket which only cares about making money and could not possibly care less about the game;
    2. Cruz is another Obama with a different spiel;
    3. Some lowlife got hurt the Devil knows how and some ambulance chaser is trying to turn it into cash.

    What are the other three?

    nk (dbc370)

  23. He was ticketed on I-5. He was hit by a car on a different freeway (the 22).

    Nick M. (f8e14b)

  24. kishnevi (294553) — 1/21/2015 @ 7:35 am

    The off-ramp on the 22 mentioned is a mile or more from the interchange between CA-22 and I-5, which itself is several miles from Disneyland (no telling where they were when the Chippie was writing the ticket).
    I’m surprised that the rider wasn’t arrested for his “reckless driving” in conjunction with a .204 BAL….especially since they impounded his m/c.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  25. @23 if that’s the case then he had to work at getting back on the fwy. if he was close to the disneyland offramp he would have been a couple of off ramps from 22.

    labcatcher (61737c)

  26. Yes, 100mph + impoundment + behavior from BAC of .204 but no arrest and leaving him on the interstate, just doesn’t add up.

    But making a big assumption that all that is true, seems to me the CHP officer would’ve had a duty not only to corral the guy for his own sake, but for the sake of every other driver on the interstate. I would expect to see the driver who hit the guy to be suing the CHP and the drunken motorcyclist as well. At a minimum he has a bent car.

    Eric (0ebc49)

  27. Some cops do really stupid and irresponsible things. Fortunately only a small minority. One night in 1992, I had a fuel pump blow out, stalling by car on a city street at the base of a freeway onramp. A Sacramento PD officer told me to get in my car and release the brake. His cruiser pushed my car onto the elevated freeway, and he departed. Problem solved, I was now in CHP’s area. However, there was no shoulder and 2/3 of my car was in a traffic lane. I hightailed it down the ramp and called for a tow. Was fortunate that neither I nor my car were turned into grease spots.

    David (6f3506)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0821 secs.