State supreme court declines to review ruling for Vallejo to release badge bending report

VALLEJO – A California Supreme Court panel gave the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California another win Wednesday, declining to review a lower court’s ruling that Vallejo must release an investigator’s report into officers bending their badges to mark shootings at the Vallejo Police Department. 

The court’s decision comes months after an appeals court found that the investigation was not a confidential personnel record, but was instead subject to public disclosure under Senate Bill 1421, a 2019 state law which requires the release of records related to police shootings to the public. The appeals court found that the records the ACLU sought, which includes the report and any supplemental materials, is “generally subject to public disclosure.”

A panel of California Supreme Court justices on Wednesday declined the city’s request that they review the case. Associate Justice Joshua Paul Groban dissented in favor of granting it review.

Emi Young, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Northern California, said Wednesday that, in her opinion, “The thrust of the court of appeal’s opinion is clear: the badge-bending investigation and information about Vallejo officers’ involvement in badge-bending must be released to the public.” 

The appeals court ruling had revealed portions of what was contained inside former Sonoma County sheriff Robert Giordano’s investigative report into badge-bending, which took a year and cost more than $100,000 to examine 17 years of police shootings in Vallejo. 

When contacted about the higher court’s rejection of its petition, City Attorney Veronica Nebb said, “At this time we have not received any written decision from the court, so are unable to comment.”

Former police Capt. John Whitney revealed the badge bending practice publicly in 2020 after he said department superiors failed to act. The city ordered the investigation and hired Giordano to conduct it, but Vallejo did not release Giordano’s investigative report, claiming it was a confidential personnel record. 

The ACLU’s case began when it requested the investigation and additional records pertaining to badge bending from the police department. Solano County Superior Court Judge Stephen Gizzi ordered the release of a portion, with redactions to protect the identities of officers, witnesses and their families.

Both the city and the ACLU sought review by the appeals court, with the ACLU arguing for full publication of the report since it was “investigating the conduct of officers in shootings,” while the city argued that the investigation was not case- or officer-specific.

Young said given the higher court’s ruling, the case will next be sent back to the trial court to make a final determination about specific redactions and records which might be withheld. That could include preliminary drafts of the badge-bending report, she said.

“We believe, as the California legislature did in adopting SB 1421, that the public can only benefit from transparency around serious allegations of misconduct by their police officers,” Young said. “This is the only way for members of the community to seek accountability and closure. We will continue to advocate for the public’s right to know until the materials are publicly available.”