Filed 12/7/05 Correa v. County of Riverside CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Dallas Holmes, Judge. Affirmed.

Lackie & Dammeier, Dieter C. Dammeier, Michael A. McGill and Michael A. Morguess for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Ferguson, Praet & Sherman and Shane D. Sullivan for Defendants and Respondents.

Manuel Correa (Correa) challenges the trial court's order denying his amended verified petition for writ of administrative mandate (writ petition). The writ petition asked the trial court to reverse the arbitrator's decision upholding respondents' (County of Riverside and Riverside County Sheriff's Department) decision to terminate Correa's employment. We find Correa's arguments to be without merit and thus we affirm the trial court's order denying the writ petition.

Facts

Correa became a deputy sheriff with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department (the Department) in 1990 when the Department absorbed the Desert Hot Springs Police Department with whom he was employed. At the time of the incidents at issue here, he was assigned to the sheriff's station in Lake Elsinore.

Procedural History

On July 25, 2002, the Department served Correa with a Notice of Intent to Terminate. On August 27, 2002, Correa met with his union representatives and officials of the Department regarding the charges and proposed discipline. The Department terminated Correa on October 11, 2002, after sustaining three allegations of misconduct. Allegation 1 was that Correa had failed to appear in court on April 10 and 11, and September 17 and 27, 2001, after having received a subpoena or having been ordered by the judge to appear for those dates. Allegation 2 was that Correa brought discredit to the Department by disrupting court proceedings and the Riverside County District Attorney's Office to the point that the supervising deputy district attorney made a formal written complaint to the Department. Allegation 3 was that Correa was dishonest when initially questioned about the court appearances.

Correa filed an administrative appeal, which was conducted by an arbitrator selected by the parties. The hearings were conducted on April 7, 8 and 18, 2003. The arbitrator issued her decision on June 2, 2003, upholding the termination. The arbitrator concluded that, even without considering the failures to appear in court in April 2001, the County of Riverside (County) was justified in terminating Correa because, in September 2001, he initially lied to his superiors about not appearing in court in September of 2001.

On December 5, 2003, Correa filed his writ petition in the superior court alleging two causes of action. First, Correa argued that the County violated his rights under the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (Gov. Code, § 3303 et seq.;[1] the Act) when it based his termination on: (1) information obtained through unlawful interrogations in violation of section 3303; and (2) acts in April 2001 that occurred more than 12 months before the July 25, 2002, Notice of Intent to Terminate, in violation of section 3304, subdivision (d). Second, Correa argued that the arbitrator prejudicially abused her discretion when she upheld the termination because, among other things, the Department violated the Act, as discussed above. The trial court denied the writ petition, ruling that: (1) none of the exchanges that Correa labeled â€