Friday, August 22, 2003
|
Friday, August 22, 2003 |
|
Sheriff: Marshals making unlawful arrests
County jail to refuse marshals' prisoners; Dunn says flap is 'paranoia' By
CAL BEVERLY and By JOHN
THOMPSON
County marshals making traffic arrests are acting outside the scope of their legal authority and may be placing the county in jeopardy of lawsuits, Fayette County Sheriff Randall Johnson wrote to the Fayette County Commission Thursday. The sheriff served notice that the county jail will no longer accept prisoners arrested by marshals if they involve violations of state law. "It is important for you to know that marshals do not have the power of arrest without a warrant," Johnson wrote the commissioners in a letter obtained by The Citizen under an open records request. Because of that, Johnson said, "I will not accept traffic cases, or any other accusations of violations of state law made by marshals, into the county jail." Commission Chairman Greg Dunn is dismissing the controversy as "nothing but silliness. There's nothing to it," he said. Dunn called the sheriff's concerns "paranoia." Dunn is still studying a letter from Johnson expressing the sheriff's concerns about the marshals. The marshals' department was created by the commission in the 1980s to enforce county ordinances like zoning rules. "Their job description has not changed. They're doing the same things they always have," Dunn said Thursday. The sheriff's letter raises the question whether the marshals have the statutory authority to do those "things they have always" done and whether the uniformed marshals might be acting beyond their jurisdiction. The sheriff noted a mid-1990s opinion by the state attorney general's office that said state law specifically forbids marshals from acting with police powers. In a story in The Citizen Wednesday, both County Administrator Chris Cofty and longtime Emergency Services Chief Jack Krakeel denied that the county intended for the marshals to become a de facto county police force. The flap has been replayed many times in Georgia. Generally it pits a county's sheriff with his constitutional powers against a county commission that wants more control over county law enforcement activities. "Nothing has been said to me with respect to creating a law enforcement police department," Krakeel said. "My concern is, notwithstanding the recent comments to the press, an attempt seems to be afoot to use the Marshal's Office as a county police department," the sheriff countered. "The law is clear and unambiguous that they are not the same, and marshals cannot perform duties that may be performed by a county police department." "If they [marshals] observe a traffic offense that endangers the public, then yes," a marshal will make a traffic stop, Krakeel said in The Citizen Wednesday. "... If someone is crossing a double-yellow line on a curve or weaving erratically," the marshals will make a traffic stop to protect the public, said Krakeel, who now heads the newly created umbrella department that includes the marshals. Those traffic stops worry the sheriff, who said marshals have no authority to stop drivers for traffic violations, although at least nine such arrests were made in the past month, an examination of state court records by The Citizen revealed. "Any traffic stop may necessitate an arrest, and thus a marshal would have placed himself as well as the county in a position of tremendous liability," Johnson wrote. "In addition any investigation of violations of any other state law, whether having been committed on county property or not, might also necessitate an arrest and again would place the marshal and the county in a position of significant liability," the sheriff wrote. "The only duties marshals/constables have are the ones conferred on them by statute," Johnson wrote. "Marshals do not have general police powers and are not charged with any duty to enforce criminal laws of the state." Johnson also said he was concerned that the marshals' new badges identifying them as public safety deputies "will mislead the public as to the authority of these marshals." That's one of the things Dunn finds most amusing. The marshals' new badges have Public Safety Deputy on the top portion of the badge, and marshal underneath. "All of the people in the public safety division will have those badges, including the 911 personnel and animal control," Dunn added. The commission chairman said Thursday he is just flabbergasted by all the controversy this week over what he calls a "reorganization." "We've put the county's departments under six different divisions to make things more workable. It hasn't cost the taxpayers anything, except for small salary increases for the division directors. It's not like we're Peachtree City and going out and hiring an assistant city administrator," he said. Dunn said the marshals are not patrolling the county's roads, but said if they see something happening, they will investigate the incident. "I'm sure the sheriff doesn't want to see a drunk driver get away," he said. The commission chairman also pointed to the recently passed county budget as proof that there is not a "secret" plot to start a county police department. "Why is it that the only increase in the budget was for the Sheriff's Department and not the marshals?" Dunn dismissed the whole situation as "paranoia" and thinks the county's time can best be spent worrying about other issues. The controversy also is likely to affect pending cases in Fayette State Court, which has jurisdiction in some cases involving marshals' citations, but just what impact the police powers dispute might have long-term is still unknown.
|
||