Score: +1 (1/2/0)
Nevada County Grand Jury • 2015-2016

Law Enforcement Evidence Handling Units

Published: June 09, 2016 14 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 9 findings

F1
The physical facilities of all four evidence handling units are adequate and, where needed, extra space is being considered.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Consolidation of the Grass Valley Police Department and the Nevada City Police Department evidence handling units should be considered again. [F8]
F2
The staff at all four evidence handling units appear to be well-trained and capable. The use of sworn officers in the Nevada City Police Department Evidence Handling Unit removes patrol officers from their primary duties to the detriment of efficient law enforcement. The Nevada City Police Department is seeking to replace the sworn officers performing evidence handling duties with a non-sworn employee or volunteer.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Alternatively, the Nevada City Police Department should expedite its efforts to obtain and train a non-sworn evidence technician to reduce personnel costs and to free sworn officers for their primary duties. [F8]
F3
Three of the evidence handling units have adopted and follow written policies and procedures that are in line with recommended best practices. The Nevada County Sheriff’s Office’s written policies and procedures are out-of-date and its actual policies and procedures are adequate only because of well-trained and skillful evidence technicians. The most experienced of those technicians is about to retire.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The Nevada County Sheriff’s Department should draft and adopt written policies and procedures for its Sheriff’s Property Unit that accurately reflect the current actual practice of its evidence technicians and that are in compliance with the current state of the law and best practices as recommended by POST and Lexipol. [F3]
F4
The police department evidence handling units are marginally in compliance with their own policies and procedures and with best practices concerning audits and inventories of the evidence handling units although they all are due or overdue for biennial external audits.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The Nevada County Sheriff’s Department should immediately arrange for a complete external audit of its Sheriff’s Property Unit. [F5]
F5
The Nevada County Sheriff’s Office’s Sheriff’s Property Unit has not been subjected to an external audit since 2007 and there are no written records of any internal audits, inventories or inspections since that time. Hence, the Nevada County Sheriff’s Office’s Sheriff’s Property Unit is out of compliance with its own written policies and procedures and with best practices concerning audits and inventories of evidence handling units.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
The Nevada County Sheriff’s Department should conduct a complete inventory of its Sheriff’s Property Unit upon the retirement of its senior evidence technician. [F3 &
F6
Best practices dictate that all agencies should rigorously adhere to the requirement for a complete inventory upon a change of evidence technician or supervisor. Additionally, random spot inventories need to be performed and documented. Inventories of firearms, narcotics and money must be conducted on at least a quarterly basis. Finally, external audits must be conducted on a biennial basis at a minimum.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
The Nevada County Sheriff’s Department should require that there be periodic spot inventories of its Sheriff’s Property Unit and should require that written records of those spot inventories be maintained. [F5]
F7
All four evidence handling units spend considerable time in purging and disposing of evidence that is no longer needed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
All agencies should rigorously adhere to the requirement for a complete inventory upon a change of evidence technician or supervisor. Additionally, random spot inventories need to be performed and documented. Inventories of firearms, narcotics and money must be conducted on at least a quarterly basis. Finally, external audits must be conducted on a biennial basis at a minimum. [F3]
F8
Three evidence handling units expressed concerns about the timeliness of evidence disposition authorization from the Nevada County District Attorney’s office. Such delays adversely affect the ability to purge evidence in a timely fashion.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
The Nevada County District Attorney should continue to develop and improve its process for authorizing the disposal of evidence. [F7]
F9
Given the size of the Nevada City Police Department, maintaining its own evidence handling unit creates a burden in terms of space, manpower and cost. In the past, the Grass Valley Police Department and the Nevada City Police Department considered consolidating their separate evidence handling units into one central evidence handling unit.
No recommendations for this finding

Agency Responses 1

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

No Responses Found 5

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Grass Valley City
Nevada City City
Nevada County District Attorney Elected County Office
Nevada County Sheriff Elected County Office
Town of Truckee Town