California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
from the Superior Court of Riverside County No. RIC1314234.
Sharon J. Waters, Judge. Affirmed.
Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, J. Scott Tiedemann and Christopher
S. Frederick for Defendants and Appellants.
Office of Michael A. Morguess and Michael A. Morguess for
Plaintiff and Respondent.
& Mayer, Martin J. Mayer and Paul R. Coble for California
State Sheriffs' Association and California Police
Chiefs' Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of
Defendants and Appellants.
and appellants City of Riverside (City) and Riverside Police
Chief Sergio Diaz appeal the grant of the petition for writ
of mandate (Writ) filed by plaintiff and respondent Camillo
had been employed as a Riverside Police Officer since 1995.
On May 21, 2013, a Memorandum of Finding was sustained
against Bonome for failing to properly investigate and report
an incident involving a sexually abused girl in June 2012.
Chief Diaz recommended Bonome be terminated. Prior to the
hearing on his termination, Bonome applied for and was
granted disability retirement by CalPERS for a back injury he
sustained while on duty.
his disability retirement being effective, Bonome requested
his retirement identification badge and that the badge
include a Carry Concealed Weapon (CCW) endorsement.
Bonome's request was denied because Chief Diaz and the
City did not consider him to be “honorably
retired” as that term is defined in Penal Code section
16690. The City and Chief Diaz stated he was not entitled to
a hearing to dispute the finding. Bonome filed the Writ
contending he was honorably retired and entitled to a CCW
endorsement, and if the endorsement was denied for cause, he
was entitled to a good cause hearing. The trial court agreed
and granted the Writ.
appeal, the City and Chief Diaz insist the trial court erred
when it determined Bonome was “honorably retired”
within the meaning of Penal Code section 16690 based only on
the plain language of the statute and without reviewing the
legislative history. This interpretation leads to an absurd
uphold the trial court's grant of the Writ. The City and
Chief Diaz may deny the CCW endorsement for cause but Bonome
is entitled to a good cause hearing if it is denied.
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
INVESTIGATION OF BONOME AND RECOMMENDATION
was hired as a police officer by the City on April 14, 1995,
and was authorized to carry a concealed weapon on and off
duty as a peace officer as defined in Penal Code section
to the Memorandum of Finding prepared by the Riverside Police
Department after its investigation, on June 7, 2012, Bonome
was dispatched to a residence to investigate a report of
sexual abuse of a 14-year-old girl. Bonome had investigated
claims of abuse by the same girl in 2010 but the accusations
were determined to be unfounded because she would not
disclose the abuse. On June 7, Bonome spoke with the girl at
a friend's house. She told Bonome she was being sexually
abused by her 16-year-old brother and her mother physically
abused her. She did not want to return to her home because
she feared they would take her to Mexico before she could
these expressed fears, Bonome took the girl back to her home.
Bonome told the girl's mother that he had contacted child
protective services (CPS). Bonome did not file a police
report. The following day, CPS contacted Bonome's
supervisor expressing concern that the girl was returned to
her home. Another Riverside Police Department detective
arrested the 16-year-old brother who admitted he had been
sexually abusing the girl since 2010.
October 10, 2012, Bonome suffered an on-duty back injury.
internal affairs investigation was conducted regarding the
June 7 incident. A Memorandum of Finding was issued on May
21, 2013, sustaining a finding that Bonome had failed ...