Charles v. New Orleans Police Dep't

Decision Date19 June 2019
Docket NumberNO. 2019-CA-0115,2019-CA-0115
Citation274 So.3d 914
Parties Rhett CHARLES v. NEW ORLEANS POLICE DEPARTMENT
CourtCourt of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

274 So.3d 914

Rhett CHARLES
v.
NEW ORLEANS POLICE DEPARTMENT

NO. 2019-CA-0115

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

June 19, 2019


Kevin Vincent Boshea, ATTORNEY AT LAW, 2955 Ridgelake Drive, Suite 207, Metairie, LA 70002, COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

Elizabeth Robins, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY, Renee Goudeau, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, Sunni J. LeBeouf, CITY ATTORNEY, 1300 Perdido Street, Suite 5E03, New Orleans, LA 70112, COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE

(Court composed of Judge Terri F. Love, Judge Roland L. Belsome, Judge Sandra Cabrina Jenkins )

274 So.3d 916

Plaintiff–Appellant, Rhett Charles, appeals the judgment of the Civil Service Commission (Commission) which sustained his demotion and one-day suspension by the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD). For the following reasons, we affirm the Commission's decision.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Appellant, a twenty-eight year veteran, worked as a sergeant for the NOPD. In 2016, he supervised at least fourteen officers in the Alternative Police Response (APR Unit). During that time, he engaged in a series of sexually inappropriate conversations with two of his subordinate female employees: Officer Shannon Reeves and Officer Nicole Alcala.

After receiving a complaint regarding Appellant's behavior, the NOPD initiated a Public Integrity Bureau investigation. The investigation was assigned to Sergeant Christopher Johnson. At the conclusion of the investigation, Sergeant Johnson found that Appellant violated the NOPD's Rules 31 and 42 concerning professional conduct and neglect of duty. In accordance with these findings, discipline was recommended.

After the disciplinary hearing, the NOPD issued a one-day suspension and demotion for the violations. As a result, Appellant filed an appeal with the Commission. After a hearing, the Commission sustained the NOPD's disciplinary decision and denied the appeal. This appeal followed.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

An appellate court is to apply the clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous standard of review when reviewing the Commission's factual findings. Bannister v. Dep't of Streets , 95-0404, p. 8 (La. 1/16/96), 666 So.2d 641, 647 (citing Walters v. Dep't of Police of the City of New Orleans , 454 So.2d 106 (La. 1984) ). When "evaluating the Commission's determination as to whether the disciplinary action is both based on legal cause and commensurate with the infraction, the court should not modify the Commission's order unless it is arbitrary, capricious, or characterized by abuse of discretion." Id. A decision by the Commission is "arbitrary or capricious" when there is no rational basis for the action taken. Id.

DISCUSSION

Appellant asserts three assignments of error, concerning two issues: the

274 So.3d 917

sufficiency of the evidence and the disciplinary action. The first issue is whether the NOPD established the violations by a preponderance of the evidence. The second issue is whether the Commission erred in upholding the demotion and suspension of Appellant.

First, Appellant argues that the evidence was insufficient to establish that he committed the alleged violations. More specifically, Appellant challenges the credibility of the NOPD's witnesses.

At the hearing, several witnesses gave graphic testimony concerning Appellant's inappropriate behavior. Officer Reeves testified that Appellant asked her to pretend he was not her supervisor, commented on her genitals, spoke about sexual exploits, and inquired about preferred sexual positions. Further, Appellant invited her to visit his home, explaining that he "walk[s] around the house naked" and described lewd acts. On a separate occasion, Appellant put his arm around her and shook her, commenting that he was checking on his "friends" while looking down Officer Reeves' shirt.

After the APR Unit moved from the New Orleans Emergency Communications Center to NOPD headquarters in 2016, Appellant called Officer Reeves into his office and told her that all he saw was "t***ies" when she entered. She...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Saulny v. New Orleans Police Dep't
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 11 mars 2020
    ... ... Charles v ... New Orleans Police Dep't , 19-0115, p. 2 (La. App. 4 Cir. 6/19/19), 274 So.3d 914, 916, writ denied , 19-01144 (La. 10/8/19), 280 So.3d 589. As ... ...
  • Durning v. New Orleans Police Dep't
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 25 mars 2020
    ... ... On appeal, this Court reviews the Commission's factual findings under a clearly wrong or manifest error standard of review. Charles v. New Orleans Police Dep't , 19-0115, p. 2 (La. App. 4 Cir. 6/19/19), 274 So.3d 914, 916, writ denied , 19-01144 (La. 10/8/19), 280 So.3d 589. When ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT