Lorenzana v. County of Monterey CA6

Filed 9/26/14 Lorenzana v. County of Monterey CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

EDUARDO LORENZANA, H038050 (Monterey County Plaintiff and Appellant, Super. Ct. No. M111479)

v.

COUNTY OF MONTEREY et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

Eduardo Lorenzana appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for writ of mandate, request for an injunction and request for declaratory relief related to his termination from the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office. On appeal, Mr. Lorenzana asserts the trial court erred because as an at-will employee of the sheriff’s office, he was entitled to a full evidentiary hearing before termination under the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights. (Gov. Code, §§ 3300, et seq.) STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE Mr. Lorenzana was hired by the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office in 1986 and worked through the ranks until he was promoted in 2005 to sheriff’s commander. As a sheriff’s commander, Mr. Lorenzana had a permanent position with the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office. In 2008, Mr. Lorenzana accepted a position as chief deputy sheriff under then-Sheriff Mike Kanalakis. When Mr. Lorenzana accepted the position, he signed a “Notification and Acknowledgement of At-Will Employment.” The notification

stated, “[T]he position for which you have been selected is an ‘At-Will’ position and, as an incumbent in that position, you will serve at the pleasure of your appointing authority. Serving ‘at the pleasure of your appointing authority’ means that: [¶] 1. Adverse action (which includes but is not limited to dismissal, suspension, demotion, reduction in salary, or written reprimand) may be taken against you after your appointing authority has provided you with a written notice setting forth the adverse action and has provided you an opportunity to discuss that action with him/her personally prior to its effective date. The cause(s) for the adverse action shall not be included in the notice. [¶] 2. If adverse action is taken in compliance with the notice procedure outlined above, as an employee who serves at the pleasure of his/her appointing authority, you will not have the right to appeal regarding such adverse action. [¶] 3. In the event you have heretofore held a permanent position in the same Monterey County department, by your acceptance of this appointment to an ‘At-Will’ position, you are giving up any vested legal right you may have to continued employment with the County of Monterey, and/or return to your permanent position within the department.” Former Sheriff Kanalakis lost the election for Monterey County Sheriff to Scott Miller in November 2010. Former Sheriff Kanalakis began taking steps to transfer Mr. Lorenzana back to the position of sheriff commander; however, he was unsuccessful completing the transfer. Sheriff Miller took office on December 31, 2010. On January 13, 2011, Sheriff Miller sent Mr. Lorenzana a letter terminating his appointment as chief deputy sheriff effective January 21, 2011. The letter stated that the termination was “non-disciplinary in nature and [was] based on [his] at-will status.” Mr. Lorenzana and his attorney met with Sheriff Miller and his assistant on January 27, 2011. They expressed their position that former Sheriff Kanalakis transferred Mr. Lorenzana back to the sheriff’s commander position before he left office. Sheriff