HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-10-2001 ICPD Reports/Memos ICPD TRAINING
DATE: April 1, 2001'
TO: ChiefWinkelhake
From: K.Hurd .. ,
REF: March Training Report
Background Investigations
03/5-9/01
Kelsay
40 Hours
MTTU 1V
Training in conducting background investigations. Included legal aspects and sources
which can be used in background investigations.
Fingerprint Training
03/07/01
17 Sworndnon-swom
3 Hours
ICPD
Training in the taking of fingerprints and the legal requirements for submission of
fingerprints. Also included training in the evaluation of prints which have been taken.
Stop Stick
03/08/01
6 Supervisors
2 Hours
ICPD
Train the trainer training in the use and deployment of stop sticks for intervening in
vehicle pursuits.
Decision Making
03/12-16/01
Hart
40 Hours
MTTU IV
Training in use of force and the use of force continuum. Included hands/scenario and
classroom training. Included the development of training in the Use of Force.
Bingo
03/13/01
6 Supervisors '
2 Hours : :' ' :'!
Iowa City -
Training in laws relating to gaming/gambling. Things to look for, common types of
violations and resources to use in the investigation of gambling cases.
Rave
03/14/01
5 swom
8 Hours
Iowa City
Training for personnel in Raves and drug use commonly associated with Raves.
Natl. Governors Traffic Safety Conference
03/18-21/01
Johnson/Steffen
32 Hours
Training in various aspects of traffic safety. Included recent statistics, trends and
prevention strategies to improve driver safety.
Standard Field Sobriety Test Inst. Recertification
03/27/01
Lippold
4 Hours
ILEA
Training / Updating for departments Field Sobriety Test instructor. Included changes,
legal issues and update on changing legislation.
Firearms Training
03/26-28/01
60 Sworn
4 Hours
Training in use of the firearm. Included classroom instruction and firing the handgun.
Included qualification course.
SRT Training Day
03/12/01
SRT members
8 Hours
Training in room entry and searches. Also work on hostage rescue and rapid search
techniques.
Copy: City Manager
Captain Widmer
PCRB
IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
TRAINING BULLETIN 01-47
DATE: March 5th, 2001
TO: Commanders (all sworn)
FROM: k. hurd
SUBJECT: WT 01-34 Hotel/Motel Disorderly House
This weeks' watch training reviews the still applicable 8/91 City Atty. opinion on
disorderly patrons at a motel. This opinion clearly states that the refunding of
any monies is a civil matter between the motel and renter. While we will not evict
people, we may file appropriate criminal charges. In addition, the opinion
identifies steps that should be taken prior to the filing of criminal charges.
Cc: Chief Winke[hake
Capt. Johnson
Capt. Widmer
Watch Training 01-34
Hotel/Motel Disorderly Tenants
Scenario ~ You receive a call from a downtown motel ref. patrons having a party in one
of the rooms and creating a disturbance for the other patrons. Upon your arrival the
manager tells you he wants the party ended and the people renting the room evicted.
Critical Issues - Do you have the authority to remove the attendees from the room? To
what extent can you go to remove the person(s) renting the room? What steps need to be
taken by the hotel management?
Discussion - According to the City Atty. opinion issued 8/16/9l and reviewed at our
request in Feb. 2001, the 91 opinion still guides our response to disturbance type calls at
local hotel/motels. This opinion states that while innkeepers have the authority to eject or
remove a guest who disturbs other guests and fails to curb their behavior after notice,
"whether the innkeeper is obligated to refund monies paid in advance by a customer is a
question of contract between the parties and not an issue of concern to police."
The City Atty. then makes the following suggestions for attempting to resolve the
situation. When a guest is unacceptably disruptive, the innkeeper should contact the
party and personally inform them that their behavior is disruptive and is a violation of the
contract that will result in eviction unless the behavior is curtailed. If the behavior does
not improve sufficiently, the innkeeper should then inform the person they are deemed
evicted and they should leave immediately. If a guest refuses to leave, the innkeeper
should call the police. Upon arrival the officer should first confirm that the guest has
received a warning and that the guest has been notified by the innkeeper to leave the
premises immediately. If the guest still refuses to leave AND the innkeeper is willing to
pursue charges, criminal trespass or possibly disorderly conduct COULD be filed against
the guest.
If the officer does not observe a violation of law occurring, and the innkeeper is unwilling
to press charges, the officer should NOT participate in evicting the guest. Until the
officer decides to file a criminal charge, the dispute is a private, contractual matter
between the innkeeper and the guest. Police should not intervene as "private security
guards" and should limit their involvement to keeping the peace and enforcing laws.
In cases where a person is holding a large party in a motel room and the motel has made
their notification; upon the arrival of the officer, if the party is still ongoing the officer
may file a charge under the Cities' disorderly house ordinance and require other "non-
resident" persons on the premises to disperse.
The fitll opinion is available in the training office.
IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
TRAINING BULLETIN 01-50~:--c'* ....
DATE: March 12th, 2001 · '
TO: Commanders (all sworn) -"
FROM: k.hurd
SUBJECT: WT 01-36 Officer/Driver Interactions
This weeks' watch training reviews considerations for officers when dealing with
citizens on traffic stops. While these guidelines are from NHTSA manual
Strengthening The Citizen and Law Enforcement Partnership at the Traffic Stop:
You will notice elements from the 8 Step tactical/traffic from verbal judo.
Cc: Chief Winkelhake
Capt. Johnson
Capt, Widmer
: ;...
Watch Training 01-36 -
Officer/Driver Interactions
Scenario - You are on routine patrol and stop a vehicle for going through a red light. On
your approach you can see the driver is distraught or upset? '. i-.
Critical Issues - What can you do to minimize conflict between yourself and the driver?
What demeanor should you use when interacting with the driver? What are
considerations when interacting with the public?
Discussion - The following guidelines are adapted from the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration manual Strengthening the Citizen and Law Enforcement
Partnership at the Traffic Stop:
There are three primary purposes for making a traffic stop: 1) to stop a violation of the
law for public safety reasons. This is accomplished by making the stop. 2) To serve as a
general deterrent to other drivers. Officer's visible presence with a vehicle has an effect
on other drivers. 3) To change the driver's action in the future. This may be in the way
of education, warning or citing the person involved.
Following are considerations/tips to be used when making a traffic stop.
1. Maintain a self-assured, professional appearance in your manner of dress and bearing.
2. At the beginning of the interaction, greet the driver and state your name and the
agency.
3. Ifnot in "traditional" uniform present proper identification.
4. Address the driver by name. (i.e. Mr. Anderson)
5. At the beginning of the stop, inform the driver why he/she was stopped.
6. Describe the violation in terms of what the vehicle was observed doing, not the
driver.
7. Ask the driver where they keep their DL and registration before asking them to get it.
8. When requesting the DL/registration use the word please.
9. Ask the driver why? (Is there any justification)
10. Avoid asking a series of random challenging questions just to inflict control or to
intimidate.
11. Unless circumstances dictate, avoid talking to violators with your hand on your
weapon.
12. Appear casual in observing and questioning.
13. Use the SOFT approach
a. Smile
b. Open gestures, use your hands, nod when they are talking
c. Focus - make the driver/occupants the center of your attention
d. Tone - The quality/tone ofyour voice says more than your words.
14. Provide instructions before you return to your vehicle. I.e. For your safety and mine
please remain in your vehicle.
15. Take action in a timely fashion.
16. Avoid taking action (warn v cite) based solely on the driver's attitude.
17. Explain to drivers' why the violation is a hazard to them and other on the road.
18. Compliment drivers on good behavior. I.e. thank you for wearing your seatbelt.
19. The last words by an officer may be the basis for a long lasting opinion about the
officer and the department. Try to end with a positive compliment i.e. thanks for your
cooperation or please drive safely. (avoid have a nice day)
20. Assist the driver in reentering the roadway.
IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
TRAINING BULLETIN 01-51
DATE: March 15th, 2001
TO: Gommanders (all sworn)
FROM: k.hurd
SUBJECT: WT 01-37 PBT/Implied Consent
This weeks' watch training discusses PBT procedures in relation to the OWl
process. A recent decision by an administrative law judge reveals that when
considering the results of a PBT in the OWl process that officers are required to
follow the instructions provided by the manufacturer of the unit. Failure to do so
may result in any subsequent (evidentiary) tests based on the PBT, being
inadmissible. If the person says they have not consumed alcohol in the past 15
minutes you may test immediately, if alcohol is present retest in 2-5 minutes.
The administrative rules for the use of PBT in testing persons relative to Public
Intoxication are the same...a Dept. of Public Safety approved device and
following the manufacturers instructions. In this case, if the tests would be
"evidentiary" in nature, the person needs to be observed for 15 minutes prior to
the administration of the test. If you are not going to use the PBT for evidence of
intoxication, the charge may be based on SFSTs and/or behavior. In this case
the "post test" would need to conform to the manufacture's instructions, again if
they state they have not consumed alcohol within 15 minutes you may test, if
present you would need to retest in 2-5 minutes.
Cc: Chief Winkelhake
Capt. Johnson
Capt. Widmer
Watch Training 0 1-3 7 '-
Implied Consent/PBT --,
.,
Scenario ~ You are on routine patrol and stop a vehicle for going through a stop signZ'
There is an odor of a alcohol coming from the diver. You have him exit the vehicle and
administer the HGN, which is a 6, the W/T, which is a 4, and OLS, which is a 4. You
decide to administer a PBT.
Critical Issues - What procedures need to be adhered to for the administration of a PBT
to be considered in the OWl process? Must a PBT be administered prior to "evidentiary"
testing of a subject? What should be marked on the Implied Consent form? What about
.02 revocations?
Discussion - There has been a recent administrative law decision regarding the
administration of PBTs and there relationship to the OWl process. In this case the officer
made a valid stop, detected the odor of alcohol, administered the HGN (6) and then
administered a PBT, which indicated in excess of.10. The subject was then taken to the
PD where additional tests were administered (W/T and OLS) both of which the driver
failed. At this time the officer "invoked" implied consent, filled out the form and marked
in section B of the form (Check all that apply) "submitted to preliminary breath screening
test (PBT) which indicated an alcohol concentration of ten hundredths (0.10) or more.
The subject submitted to the request and which recorded above .10. The subject was
charged with OWl and DOT revoked the persoWs license. The subject requested an
Implied Consent Hearing before an administrative law judgO. The judge determined that
since the PBT was administered contrary to the manufacturers instructions (see below)
AND the results of the PBT were the sole grounds for requesting the evidentiary test, the
officer DID NOT have grounds to request the evidentiary test and overturned the
revocation.
While the results of a PBT ARE NOT generally admissible in court proceedings they
may be used by officers in determining how they are going to proceed in their
investigation and may be used as grounds for requesting a specimen for chemical testing.
The case recently decided held that the use of a PBT in determining if a evidentiary test
should be requested was invalid 1F the procedures provided by the manufacturer of the
PBT were not followed. Chapter 321J.6 which corresponds with section B of the implied
consent form lists seven grounds that an officer may use when requesting a chemical
"evidentiary" test, one of which is PBT in excess of.10. Officers should check ALL that
apply. Chapter 321J.5 is in part..."1. When a peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that
either of the following have occurred, the peace officer may request that the operator provide a sample of
the operator's breath for a preliminary screening test using a device approved by the commissioner of
public safety for that purpose"
"2. The results of this preliminary screening test may be used for the purpose of deciding whether an arrest
should be made or whether to request a chemical test authorized in this chapter, but shall not be used in any
court action except to prove that a chemical test was properly requested of a person pursuant to this
chapter."
Iowa Administrative Code Chapter 661 Iowa Department of Public Safety, role 7.5 (2)
reads as follows: Any peace officer using an approved device shall follow the instructions
furnished by the manufacturer for the use of such a device. Each unit shall be
calibrated...
In the above case the officer used an Alco-Sensor HI. The instructions included with the
Alto-Sensor state: "If the Alto-Sensor III is being used as a Screener, the subject can be
asked if he/she has used alcohol in the last fifteen minutes. If the response is negative,
test the subject immediately; if otherwise, wait fifteen minutes before testing. If the test
result is positive, wait 2 to 5 minutes and take a second test. (emphasis added) A much
lower result strongly suggests mouth alcohol was present at the time of the first test.
In the above case, the officer only administered the PBT one time. The officer checked
the first box in section B of the Implied Consent form, "submitted to a PBT which
indicated an alcohol concentration often hundredths (0.10) or more. Since only a single
PBT was done, it DID NOT follow the manufacturer's instructions (wait 2-5 minutes and
retest), the evidentjury request for a sample based on the improperly administered PBT
was NOT a valid request.
Taken in conjunction with the State (Ohio) v Homan decision covered in WT 01-25 the
week of 12/18/00, it appears that officers are now going to be held accountable for strict
adherence to procedures when handling/processing OWI/ .02 Revocations cases.
Additionally, when filling out section B on the Implied Consent form officers need to
check all boxes that apply, I.e. if the subject is under arrest for OWI prior to the request
make sure you mark the box.
Officers should also consider this when administering a PBT in relation to a charge of
Public Intoxication.
Oo' me ..
IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
TI~AININC BULLETIN 01-5Z
DATE: March 27th 2001
TO: Commanders (all sworn)
FROM: k.hurd
SUBJECT: ICPD Driver Contact Sheet
Beginning April 1st, officers are required to complete an Iowa City Police Contact
Sheet on each driver of the vehicles they have contact with. These sheets do not
need to be completed on the passengers of the vehicle. Completed sheets
should be placed in the basket along with charges, reports etc.
Cc: Chief Winkelhake
Capt. Johnson
CapL Widmer
·
Watch Training 01-39 · ~_i
ICPD Contact Sheet
Scenario - You stop a vehicle for a traffic violation. Upon ending the con.ta~you;~e
required to complete an ICPD Contact Sheet.
Critical Issues - How much of the sheet needs to be completed? Do I need to do one for
the passengers? What do I do with them at the end of the watch?
Discussion - You are required to complete the contact sheet in its' entirety. The contact
sheet is to be filled out on the DRIVER and NOT the passengers of the vehicle. An ICPD
Contact Sheet MUST be completed on the driver of all vehicles stopped by members of
the Iowa City Police Dept. Until the electronic version becomes available you must put
the hard copies of the completed forms with the completed reports and charges.
Attached is a completed form. (The style of the boxes may change depending on the
scanner that is used to read and tabulate the forms)
1. Date of Contact - two-digit month, two-digit day and two-digit year. Must write in
and darken the box/oval.
2. Time 24-hour/military time. Must write in and darken the box/oval.
3. Badge - your badge number Must write in and darken the box/oval.
4. Age - Drivers age (from DL) must write in and darken box/oval.
5. Driver Info - Darken box/oval for M or F. as given on DL. If unknown darken
unknown. The unknown box should be used only when it is not clear upon running a
27.
6. Resident - Darken box/oval by appropriate box. If they live in IC use the IC box. If
they live outside Iowa City but in Johnson County use that box. If they live outside
of Johnson County but in Iowa mark other county. If they live in another state mark
other state. If they live in another country or have no address mark other. NOTE: for
students use the address that they are living at while attending school to determine
which box to complete. I.e. a person from Illinois who is living in Coralville while
attending UI would have the Johnson County box marked. Only mark ONE box in
this section.
7. Vehicle registration - mark the box/oval to indicate if the vehicle is registered in Iowa
or has a non-Iowa registration. For registration applied for or operating on a signed
over title use the state of the owner to determine the correct box.
8. Race]Ethnicity - Mark the appropriate box. The box marked should correspond with
your' initial visual impression upon making contact with the driver. Unlike traffic
charges/citations you will not indicate white AND Hispanic.
9. Consent Search Requested - Yes or No, IF YES, then was consent asked to search the
person and/or the vehicle?
10. Type of Search - IF there is a search, mark the appropriate box/oval. What was the
basis for the search, consent, officer safety (Terry Pat Down), Incident to Arrest, or
Probable Cause. If there is no search, this does not need to be completed. If there is
consent search, the Consent Search section (9) and this section shall be completed.
11. Reason for Contact - mark the oval indicating the reason for the stop or contact with
the vehicle and driver. If other is marked indicate the reason in the comments
section.
12. Use of Force - Mark the appropriate box/oval. None or if there was a use of force was
it on the driver, a passenger or both. If the driver or passenger box/oval is marked
there should be a corresponding Use of Force report.
13. Outcome - What was the result of the stop/contact? No -Action (would include
citizen assist), Citation, Arrest, Warning, Field Interview. Mark all that apply.
14. Property Seized - If there was a search mark the type(s) of property seized. If there
was no search leave this section blank. If the other box is checked list the type of
item seized in the comments section. If evidence is seized there should be a
corresponding property sheet.
15. Comments - If you are using the comment section to include other information or
detail any of the above fields darken the box/oval in the comments section.
IOWA CITY POLICE CONTACT SHEET
Male ~ bwa C~ Iowa
Femab __ John~n Co~ No~lowa
mo~ day ~ mince Unk~wn Other Coun~
0 0 0 0 0 ~ O~ of S~te C~sent SBrc~
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ~ R~dEffin~ ~ Pemn
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 ~ ' Ca~sbn
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 ~Bla~egrdAf~n~e~n
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 '6 '6 Asia~a~ I~er Co~
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 ~Spanis~atin~i~an~ 'Offi~rSafeW
~ Inc~ent to A~est
8 8 8 8 ~ ~ 8 8 Na~Amed~n I~ian ~ Probable Cau~
9 9 9 9 ~ ~ 9 9 ~Ot~r
Unknown
Rea~ for Co~c~ ~ Seiz~
Mo~ ~ob~on ~ Use of Fore?
Equipme~Registat~nV~b~n ~No~ ~ ~o~ None
__ ~ Al~hol
Cdminal Offen~ D~er C~tion Weapons
Call for Se~c~u~ect De~ehicle De~. __ Warning Nardtics
Pr~sting k~wledge or ido~atbn __ F~ Inte~ew E~den~
Spec~l DeVil __ Other
Other
Commits e ~you add any ~mments to the area listed below, you must da~en the ciwle to the left.
IOWA CITY POLICE CONTACT SHEET
I Date of Contact Time Bad e A[_~ D~ver Info R.__esident V[~hicle Registration
Female __ Johnson County Non-Iowa
month day year hour minute Unknown __Other County
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0r~' 0 0 0 '0 0 OutofState ConsentSearch
111111 111 I I 1 11 __Other Requested?
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 '3 3 R__ace/Ethnicity
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Caucasian
'5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Z Black/Negro/AfdcanAmedcan T_.~'pe of Search
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Aslan/Pacif'K: Islander Consent
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 _Spanish/Latino/Hispanic __Officer Safety
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Native American Indian Incident toArrest
9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Other Probable Cause
Unknown
R._~eason for Contact? ~ P_._mperty Seized
__ Moving Vlelatio.n Use of Force? Outcome None
- _
__ Equipment or Registation Violation None __ No Action __ Alcohol
__ Criminal Offense Driver __ Citation ,,. Weapons
__ Other Violation Passenger Arrest ~ Currency
Call for Sen/ice-Suspect Desc.Nehicle Desc. __ Warning Narcotics
Z Pre-existing knowledge or information __ Field Intentjew "' Evidence
__ Special Detail __ Other -
Other
Cements C) ff you add any comments to the area listed below, you must darken the circle to the left,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chief Winkelhake
FROM: Captain Johnson, Field Operations
Captain Widmer, Administrative Services
Co: Steve Atkins
RE: PCRB Meeting, 03-13-01
DATE: March 16, 2001
During attendance at the March 13, 2001 meeting of the Police Citizens Review Board, a
presentation was made by David C, Baldus, Professor, College of Law, University of
lowa. This presentation related to the interpretation of driver race and gender data
gathered by the lowa City Police Department. During his presentation, Prof. Baldus
introduced local attorney Peter Persaud, and invited him to comment on the issue of
Persaud's request for release of this data by the Iowa City Police Department.
Persaud stated that he and Prof. Baldus had made several requests to the Iowa City Police
Department for the release of data related to traffic stops and dispositions of those stops,
Persaud characterized the Department as not responding to those requests. He further
stated that he had filed three subpoenas and a public information request in order to get
the materials he sought and that those more formal requests had not been fulfilled, He
stated that when he inquired about why the requests had not been acted on, he was told
that the police computer system was not able to retrieve the data requested. Additionally,
statements which were negative in nature were made regarding the police department's
inability to provide dispositional data on traffic citations. He went on to state that
persons with whom he had spoken, who are knowledgeable about computers, told him
that the relrieval and release of this information was an easy process. Further, Persaud
stated that if his "computer persons" were allowed access to our system, they could
accomplish this with little difficulty. Allowing non-staffpersons access to the police
department's computer system and database is unreasonable, particularly given the vast
amount of confidential information contained in the system including criminal history
and intelligence data regulated by both state and federal law.
In an effort to determine what the City's response was to Persaud's request, we met with
Asst. City Attorney Sarah Holecek. Ms. Holeeek stated that the City had, in fact,
provided Persaud and the Public Defender's office (through another attorney) with the
raw data that was had requested. She stated that the data was not released in the "data
definition language" format that Persaud requested. She stated that the reason for this was
that a release of the data in that format would have impinged on the proprietax3t
information and intellectual property of the software provider, and consequently would
violate the software licensing agreement. Ms. Holecek stated that we have provided the
raw data requested, which is not proprietary, without violating the format and function of
the software. This is consistent with the Iowa Open Records Law, and when this
information was provided to the Public Defender's Office, the public defender agreed to
contact the City Attorney's Office if their needs had not been met. There has been no
such contact. Further, the subpoenas to which Mr. Penthad referred were issued in
connection with pending criminal cases and raise additional issues, which ffunresolved,
can be addressed by the Court.
With regard to the request for dispositional data, the police department does not maintain
disposition files for traffic stops. Those files are maintained by the clerk of district ceurt
and it would be appropriate for requests of that nature to be directed to the clerk of
district court office.
Outline
Mission Statement:
The mission of the Iowa City Police Department is to protect the rights of all persons
within its jurisdiction to be free from crime, to be secure in their possessions, and to live
in peace. By pursuing the goals of education, prevention, and enforcement, it is the
primary objective of the Iowa City Police Department to pursue the ideal of a community
frcc from crime and disorder in a fair, responsive, and professional manner.
Goals:
Prevention of Crime
Deterrents of Crime
Apprehension of Offenders
Recovery and Return of Property
Traffic Services
Public Service
Use of Personnel
Use of Resources
Interdepartmental Cooperation
Short Term Goals
Long Term Goals