The Los Angeles County Civilian Oversight Commission has filed a lawsuit against the Sheriff’s Department seeking access to confidential records related to several use-of-force incidents. The commission’s legal action stems from the department’s refusal to comply with subpoenas issued for unredacted documents, citing concerns about employee privacy and guidance from county counsel.

The dispute centers on subpoenas issued last year regarding three separate cases involving sheriff’s deputies. In 2020, Joseph Perez was severely beaten by deputies in the San Gabriel Valley, while Andres Guardado, an 18-year-old, was fatally shot in the back by deputies the same year. Another incident in 2023 involved a Norwalk deputy who pled guilty to federal civil rights charges after assaulting Emmett Brock, a transgender man. The oversight commission has sought full access to records related to these cases but has not received them.

The Sheriff’s Department provided an unsigned statement emphasizing the importance of protecting confidential personnel records and advocating for completing a meet-and-confer process to address outstanding concerns before releasing documents. The department has consistently declined to comply with subpoenas, citing the advice of the office of county counsel.

County Counsel Dawyn Harrison responded to the commission’s lawsuit, stating that it is “not legally valid” because it was neither initiated nor approved by the counsel’s office or the Board of Supervisors. Harrison emphasized that the oversight commission, like other advisory bodies, is not permitted to act independently from the Board.

However, the Civilian Oversight Commission disputes this interpretation. Former commission Chair Robert Bonner and former Inspector General Max Huntsman, who represent the commission in the suit, argue that Measure R—approved by county voters in 2020—and state law grant the commission independent subpoena authority that does not derive from the Board of Supervisors. Bonner also contends that the meet-and-confer process may not be legally required in this context.

The commission points to a March 2024 state appellate court ruling affirming the legal authority of an oversight body in Sonoma County to subpoena its Sheriff’s Office, alongside Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signing of AB 847 in fall 2025, which amended state penal code to authorize oversight commissions to review confidential Sheriff’s Department documents in closed sessions. The commission views these developments, together with Measure R, as reinforcing its legal right to obtain the requested records.

Hans Johnson, chair of the Civilian Oversight Commission, criticized the county counsel’s stance, questioning why the department is withholding the records. “Denying subpoenas for records related to law enforcement actions goes against state law, court rulings and the wishes of county voters,” he said, stressing the public’s right to transparency.

Advocates for greater disclosure include the families of the victims, such as Vanessa Perez, mother of Joseph Perez, who filed a written declaration supporting the lawsuit. Perez has publicly expressed her desire for transparency concerning her son’s beating, underscoring the need for the full facts to emerge. Her son, in a 2023 interview, described his assault as life-threatening and expressed hope that the release of evidence would vindicate his account.

The lawsuit marks a critical confrontation between county oversight efforts and the Sheriff’s Department’s resistance to disclosing potentially sensitive internal documents, reflecting ongoing tensions over accountability and public transparency in law enforcement operations in Los Angeles County.