Alley v. Office of Law Enforcement Support CA3

Filed 11/23/22 Alley v. Office of Law Enforcement Support CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

ANDREA ALLEY, C093334

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 34201700206137CUOEGDS) v.

OFFICE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT,

Defendant and Respondent.

Plaintiff Andrea Alley appeals from a judgment entered in favor of her former employer, the Office of Law Enforcement Support (OLES) after a bench trial on her claim under the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (Gov. Code, § 3300 et seq.).1 Alley has failed to establish any error in the trial court’s conclusion that she did not prove OLES violated section 3305. Therefore, we will affirm the judgment.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Government Code.

1

I. BACKGROUND A. Statutory Background Section 3305 is one of three neighboring provisions that concern the rights of public safety officers with respect to their personnel files. (See Poole v. Orange County Fire Authority (2015) 61 Cal.4th 1378, 1385 (Poole) [describing parallel provisions of the Fire Fighters Procedural Bill of Rights Act (§ 3250 et seq.)].) OLES does not challenge the trial court’s conclusion that Alley’s employment with OLES made her a peace officer within the meaning of these statutes. Section 3305 provides, in pertinent part: “No public safety officer shall have any comment adverse to his interest entered in his personnel file, or any other file used for any personnel purposes by his employer, without the public safety officer having first read and signed the instrument containing the adverse comment indicating he is aware of such comment, except that such entry may be made if after reading such instrument the public safety officer refuses to sign it.” Section 3306 explains that a public safety officer has 30 days “to file a written response to any adverse comment entered in his personnel file. Such written response shall be attached to, and shall accompany, the adverse comment.” Section 3306.5 requires an employer to permit an officer “to inspect personnel files that are used or have been used to determine that officer’s qualifications for employment, promotion, additional compensation, or termination or other disciplinary action.” (§ 3306.5, subd. (a).) If, after reviewing the file, “the officer believes that any portion of the material is mistakenly or unlawfully placed in the file, the officer may request, in writing, that the mistaken or unlawful portion be corrected or deleted.” (Id., subd. (c).) The employer must respond to the request in writing, and both the request and the response become part of the personnel file. (Id., subds. (c), (d).) B. Factual Background OLES was created by the Legislature in 2015 to serve as a watchdog agency within the California Health and Human Services Agency to monitor its internal