How to resolve AdBlock issue? Lakeport Police Department issues traffic safety advisory for first day of school
LAKEPORT, Calif. – With school starting on Wednesday at all Lakeport Unified School District campuses, the Lakeport Police Department issued a traffic safety advisory urging drivers to exercise extra caution.
In its Tuesday evening advisory, the agency reminded those who will be driving in the city that heavy foot and vehicle traffic is expected on and around the school campuses.
Motorists are asked to use caution when driving in the area and to watch out for pedestrians.
Police also reminded any students walking or riding bicycles to school to use caution and watch for traffic.
The Lakeport Police Department will have multiple marked police units in the area enforcing both traffic and parking violations.
- Details
- Written by: Lake County News reports
Judge grants preliminary injunction in RIMS case, access to continue to Lakeport Police
UKIAH, Calif. – At the end of a Friday morning hearing, a Mendocino County judge granted the city of Lakeport a preliminary injunction in its suit against the county and the sheriff over access to law enforcement records.
Judge Cindee Mayfield ruled that the city's suit against Sheriff Frank Rivero and the county of Lake – alleging that Rivero had violated the dispatch agreement between the two governments by cutting off access to the records system in April – had a reasonable likelihood of success on its merits.
Mayfield found that the parties' history of implementing the dispatch agreement showed substantial evidence of an intent to allow access to the records information management system, or RIMS.
She also granted the continuation of a temporary restraining order she granted in the case on July 1, which prevents Rivero from once again abruptly cutting off Lakeport Police's access to the records.
In addition, Mayfield found that the potential harm to the city and its police department far outweighed potential harm to the sheriff's office and the county.
City Manager Margaret Silveira, Lakeport Police Chief Brad Rasmussen and Lt. Jason Ferguson were present for the proceedings, and were pleased with the outcome.
“There's going to be no change to our access to that information,” Rasmussen said.
The suit seeks to have Lakeport's full access to RIMS restored permanently, and also asks for attorney's fees.
The city alleges that Rivero violated the county's longtime dispatch contract with Lakeport – most recently updated in 2005 – by cutting off access to the shared RIMS system, which is how the Lakeport Police Department accesses information from the calls for service that go through the county's Central Dispatch.
Lakeport officials have accused Rivero of undermining a longtime “cooperative and mutually beneficial relationship” the city had enjoyed with the county prior to his unilateral action to cut Lakeport Police off from the information.
After filing the suit against the county and Rivero this spring, the city requested that the suit be moved out of Lake County, and it subsequently went to Mendocino County, where it was assigned to Mayfield.
The two sides made their first appearance in court before Mayfield on July 1. At that time she granted Lakeport's temporary restraining order request, ordering Rivero to restore Lakeport's access to RIMS as it had been before he cut it off without warning on April 23. She also scheduled the Friday preliminary injunction hearing at that point.
After cutting off Lakeport Police's access in April, Rivero initially had claimed it was merely an auditing issue, according to Rasmussen.
Rasmussen criticized the sheriff publicly for the action, asserting that by cutting off access to vital information – that for more than a decade had been readily available to Lakeport Police – Rivero had created a safety issue not just for officers but for Lakeport's residents.
Rivero denied there were any safety issues, and in return accused Rasmussen and his staff of misusing the system, allegations that a District Attorney's Office investigation dismissed as baseless.
Separately, a Lakeport Police Department internal affairs investigation also concluded there had been no wrongdoing by the officers who use the system.
Rivero also had claimed that Lakeport Police was being provided with information they needed from the system.
However, Rasmussen had countered that what they really had been offered were time-consuming workarounds – such as having to call Central Dispatch to ask for a dispatcher to pull case details – and that as a result they were not able to get the information they needed in an efficient manner. The information also was incomplete, he said.
After Rasmussen and the city failed to make any headway in getting Rivero to restore access – Rivero refused a request to do so by the Board of Supervisors, who held a special April 26 meeting on the matter – the Lakeport City Council voted to move forward with litigation, which was filed in May.
County argues dispatch contract didn't include RIMS access
On Friday, Deputy County Counsel Shanda Harry, representing the county, argued that the city's contract with the county did not specifically reference RIMS and that therefore an intent to provide the access couldn't be inferred.
Deputy County Counsel Lloyd Guintivano, who represented Rivero, said the county had provided in its papers evidence of 400 to 500 in appropriate accesses to the RIMS system by Lakeport Police during the first three months of the year, and 35 since Mayfield had restored access through the temporary restraining order on July 1.
Guintivano said the California Department of Justice is now beginning an audit of the system.
However, Mayfield struck out statements by Rivero submitted in court documents alleging that those accesses in question were illegal, as well as Rivero opining on the intent of the 2005 version of the county and city's contract, which was created about two years before Rivero joined the sheriff's office as a deputy.
Mayfield said that the temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction don't preclude Rivero from carrying out his law enforcement duties in monitoring RIMS access.
“He can investigate and do whatever he wants,” she said. “But if there is a particular violation he is to treat that violation narrowly and not cut off access to the entire Lakeport Police Department.”
She said the county also is not required to provide RIMS access in perpetuity. Referring to the 90-day termination clause in the city and county's contract, Mayfield said the county could return at any time to seek to have the agreement terminated.
David Ruderman of the law firm of Colantuono and Levin PC, which was hired to pursue the litigation and also now holds the city attorney's contract with Lakeport, said during the hearing that the county's allegations of improper RIMS uses were a “red herring.”
Rasmussen explained after the hearing that the accesses to RIMS that the county alleged were improper were the same kinds of information queries his officers use the system for on a regular basis.
Ruderman that the county now has 20 days to answer the city's suit in preparation for a trial.
With the extensive steps required next, Ruderman said a trial for a permanent injunction could be a year out.
He said the county also could appeal the ruling to the First District Court of Appeals.
Email Elizabeth Larson at [email protected] . Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Judge dismisses pot case due to sheriff violating defendant's Miranda rights; sheriff blames prosecutors
LAKEPORT, Calif. – This week a judge dismissed a marijuana cultivation and sales case after finding that the county's sheriff violated the defendant's Miranda rights.
In the interest of justice, Judge Andrew Blum dismissed the case against Frank Phillip Frazza, 24, of Kelseyville during a Wednesday morning preliminary hearing after determining Sheriff Frank Rivero violated Frazza's Fifth Amendment right to counsel.
Senior Deputy District Attorney Art Grothe, who handled the prosecution, said the case can't be refiled. “It's gone,” he said.
In Grothe's 24 years as a prosecutor, he said he's never seen so significant of a case thrown out due to this type of Miranda violation.
Frazza's defense attorney Mike Wise said he also hasn't seen anything like the particular Miranda violation in his decades of practice.
District Attorney Don Anderson said the Miranda violation “really gutted the case so we had very little evidence left.”
Anderson said Rivero's refusal to provide additional information to the District Attorney's Office about his actions in the case also harmed the prosecution.
But in a Friday statement, Rivero blamed the situation on the District Attorney's Office.
“I believe Frazza should have been held to stand trial during his preliminary hearing, but the absence of rigorous prosecution resulted in the dismissal of a good case,” Rivero said in a written statement.
Frazza, who local court records show has no other criminal cases on his record, was charged with marijuana cultivation and possession of marijuana for sale in the case.
On Aug. 2, 2012, Rivero and other sheriff's personnel, along with code enforcement and state fish and game officials, arrived at his grow site on Cantwell Ranch Road near Lower Lake.
There, they eradicated 73 large plants – each about 7 feet tall. Grothe said sheriff's officials estimated the crop would have been worth about $600,000.
When Rivero arrived, Frazza was on the phone with a female attorney. According to Frazza's sworn statement included in court documents, Rivero told him to get off the phone, saying, “You don’t need to be talking to him, you need to be taking to me.”
“You can't do that,”Anderson said of the actions Rivero took in interfering with Frazza's discussion with his attorney. “That is such a clear violation of Miranda. Anybody in the academy would know that.”
Wise said the real Miranda issue – which guarantees the right to remain silent – was when Rivero directed Frazza to talk to law enforcement when he wasn't required to do so.
“You're telling someone that's in a custodial situation, 'You’re obligated to talk to law enforcement,' without first giving them their Miranda rights; that's a violation of the Constitution,” Wise said.
At the scene, Rivero wouldn't speak to Frazza's attorney on the phone. On the attorney's advice Frazza cooperated with Rivero's demands and unlocked the gate to allow entry to the property.
Wise said Frazza called his attorney because he was making his “very best efforts” to follow the law. The other attorney had given Frazza a large packet of information on state marijuana law to help him follow the rules.
“In his mind he was complying with the law,” said Wise, and when Frazza saw authorities arriving at the property, he called the attorney to ask what he should do next and was interrupted in the process.
According to court records, Frazza presented deputies with an envelope filled with medical recommendations which he said they refused to look at.
A sheriff's report on Frazza's arrest said he claimed to be growing for a Los Angeles collective and did not know any of the subjects listed on the recommendations. His grow was determined to be in violation of Lake County's marijuana cultivation ordinance, which had been approved the previous month.
Sheriff takes the stand
During Wednesday's hearing, Rivero made an appearance in court, taking the stand and answering questions about his role in the case.
Rivero claimed he didn’t remember a number of aspects of the case, including making the statement to Frazza to get off the phone.
Rivero had repeated that statement in a meeting of county officials last year, according to Grothe and Anderson, who were present. The meeting, they said, was to discuss how to enforce the county's marijuana cultivation ordinance.
On the stand Wednesday Rivero said he didn't recall that meeting, nor did he remember seeing email requests last year from Grothe, who was seeking a supplemental report on the Frazza case.
While Rivero said he didn't remember seeing or reviewing those emails, an email exchange between the sheriff and Grothe was submitted into the court record. It showed that Rivero had not only reviewed Grothe's request but refused to fulfill it.
After an initial request went unanswered in August 2012, on Sept. 10, 2012, Grothe sent Rivero a second formal request for a supplemental report “detailing timing, circumstances, and content of any communications between himself and defendant, specifically including statements concerning defendant's attempt to, or concerns about, telephoning his attorney.”
On Sept. 13, 2012, Rivero asked Capt. Chris Macedo to ask what other information Grothe wanted. “I only transported the suspects,” Rivero wrote.
After Grothe repeated his request in writing, Macedo forwarded him a Sept. 20 email in which Rivero said Frazza “got on the phone to his attorney and told us that she (the attorney) wanted to talk to us. I said that we would not talk to her.”
He said he transported the suspects and did a recording of their statements, with the recording provided. “This does not merit a supplemental,” Rivero wrote.
Regarding Rivero's statements that he couldn't recall those key details, Wise said, “The sheriff's demeanor in this particular case, where he testified, in my personal opinion was not consistent with it being a legitimate failure to recall details.”
Rivero's credibility on and off the stand has been an ongoing issue after Anderson determined earlier this year that Rivero had lied about his role in a nonfatal 2008 shooting.
Anderson's office is required to disclose to criminal defendants in any case in which Rivero is a material witness that he is a “Brady” officer.
“Brady” comes from the US Supreme Court case requiring the government to disclose to criminal defendants any information that could clear them, including information related to the credibility of officers involved in their cases.
Wise moved to have a significant amount of the evidence suppressed – including marijuana samples, marijuana recommendations, the binder of law documents prepared by Frazza's other attorney, and statements by Rivero, and deputies Lucas Bingham and Dennis Keithly – alleging they were taken during illegal search and seizure.
Rivero and Macedo also were ordered to turn over all correspondence with the District Attorney's Office on the case.
Wise credited Grothe with being an “honest, straight shooter” who had made multiple attempts to get the sheriff to clarify, in writing, the actions he took at Frazza's property. “But, unfortunately, he wouldn't,” Wise said of Rivero.
After considering the evidence, Blum dismissed the case.
As for whether Frazza might sue over the eradicated marijuana, Wise said he doesn't know. “That's the second half of the conversation that we haven't finished yet.”
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Police arrest alleged gunman in May drive-by shooting case
CLEARLAKE, Calif. – The Clearlake Police Department said Wednesday that its officers have taken into custody a Clearlake man who is alleged to have fired a rifle at several people at a barbecue during a May drive-by shooting.
Shade Hill, 29, was arrested Wednesday afternoon on a felony charge of assault with a firearm on a person and two felony bench warrants, according to jail records.
Police have been looking for Hill for two months, since he was implicated in the drive-by shooting that occurred on the evening of May 30 in the 1400 block of Cresta Avenue in Clearlake, according to Sgt. Nick Bennett.
No one was hurt in the incident, which involved a shot being fired at several people who were having a barbecue in the front yard of a residence, according to the original police report in the case.
One of the people at the barbecue had yelled at the driver of a vehicle speeding through the neighborhood to slow down, police reported. The driver slid the vehicle to a stop, causing two tires to be flattened after they skidded over several rocks.
After an exchange of words, the vehicle drove away, only to return two hours later. Police said when the vehicle returned, there were two people inside, with the passenger pointing a rifle out the passenger side window and firing a shot toward the people in the yard.
Police said no one was injured by the fired round. The suspect vehicle was located later that night in the area of Manzanita and Davis avenues.
The driver of the vehicle later was identified as Jose Serapio Murillo, 35, of Clearlake, who officers took into custody for the incident on June 3 following a traffic stop, according to police.
At the time of the drive-by shooting Hill was identified as a person of interest in the case. Clearlake Police detectives later determined that Hill not only was involved in the incident but was the shooter, Bennett said.
After getting a tip as to Hill's whereabouts, on Wednesday at 1 p.m. Clearlake Police Det. Ryan Peterson and Det. Travis Lenz observed Hill in the area of Saroni Parkway and took him into custody without incident, according to Bennett.
Hill was booked into Lake County Jail and is being held on a $500,000 warrant, according to jail records. He's due to make a court appearance on Friday.
Bennett said Murillo remains in custody at Lake County Jail on charges relating to the incident, including conspiracy, accessory, and a driver or owner of a vehicle allowing discharge of a firearm.
Anyone with information regarding this case is encouraged to contact Det. Ryan Peterson at 707-994-8251, Extension 320.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Committee enters 'home stretch' in sheriff's recall effort; deadline is Aug. 15 to turn in signatures
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. – With the deadline looming to turn in signatures to place a recall of the county's sheriff on the ballot, proponents said they're organizing the final push to complete the effort.
Signature gathering to place a recall of Sheriff Frank Rivero before county voters began in April, led by a group calling itself the Committee to Restore Integrity and Recall Rivero.
The petition circulating started just weeks after the Board of Supervisors gave Rivero a no confidence vote on his performance and formally requested his resignation, which he refused to give.
The recall proponents had 120 days, and they're now in their final two weeks.
Lake County Registrar of Voters Diane Fridley said the deadline to turn in the necessary signatures – in this case, 7,026 – is Aug. 15.
Christopher Rivera, a retired Lake County Sheriff's sergeant and chairman of the recall committee, said the group is in the “home stretch” of its effort.
He said Rivero has outraged residents throughout Lake County with his mismanagement, erratic behavior and lack of integrity.
“Rivero has cost our county over half a million dollars in lost revenues in the past year alone,” said Rivera. “He is a financial time bomb waiting to explode on the hardworking taxpayers of Lake County.”
As of Tuesday, the committee had collected nearly 7,500 signatures for the recall, according to Rivera.
He said they were aiming to get another 1,000 signatures in order to guarantee that the recall qualifies.
Rivera said that, in order to collect the last of the needed signatures by the deadline, the committee this week began mailing out thousands of petitions to Lake County voters.
He said dozens of volunteer signatures gatherers also will be out in force over the next two weekends.
If Rivero's recall goes to a vote, two challengers – retired Clearlake Police Chief Bob Chalk and Brian Martin, the county's assistant chief probation officer and a former sheriff's lieutenant – have indicated they will run to fulfill his term, which expires at the end of 2014.
Fridley told Lake County News that she couldn't speculate about when the recall might go before voters if it qualifies for an election.
However, it's unlikely to be completed in time to be consolidated with the general election this November, when Fridley said there are a number of school board and special district board seats on the ballot. That means a special election would need to be called.
The committee can be reached at
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
