OCPC 2010

The Toronto Police Service brought a motion to dismiss an appeal by a police officer for failing to file within the 30-day limitation period under section 70(1) of the Police Services Act.

The appellant's counsel acknowledged the delay and requested an extension.

The Commission held that the Act does not permit extensions of time for appeals, as the discretion to do so was expressly removed by 1997 amendments.

The motion was granted and the appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The Wikwemikong Tribal Police Service brought a motion to quash an appeal filed by a First Nations Constable from a finding of discreditable conduct.

The moving party argued that the Ontario Civilian Police Commission lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because First Nations Constables are explicitly excluded from the definition of 'police officer' under the Police Services Act.

The Commission agreed, finding that its statutory authority to hear appeals under section 87 of the Act applies only to police officers and complainants.

The motion was granted and the appeal was quashed.

The appellant police officer appealed a penalty of a one-year demotion from first-class to second-class constable, imposed after he was found guilty of insubordination and discreditable conduct.

The misconduct involved falsely recording an authorized missed lunch break and repeatedly refusing to surrender a personal journal referenced in his memo book.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the Hearing Officer reasonably considered the officer's prior disciplinary history, the seriousness of the misconduct, and the principles of progressive discipline in determining the penalty.

The Appellant, a police sergeant, pled guilty to discreditable conduct involving time theft and was penalized with a one-year demotion to First Class Constable along with eight conditions for reinstatement.

He appealed the conditions but abandoned the appeal of the demotion, bringing a motion to lift the automatic stay of the demotion so he could begin serving it immediately.

The Respondent supported the motion.

The Commission granted the motion, finding the appeal was not frivolous, the Appellant could be prejudiced by a delay, and lifting the stay would not adversely affect the consideration of the remaining appeal regarding the conditions.

The appellant police officer brought a motion on consent to lift the automatic stay of his penalty of demotion pending his appeal.

The officer had pled guilty to discreditable conduct for unaccounted absences and was demoted for one year with ongoing conditions.

He abandoned his appeal of the demotion but maintained his appeal of the conditions.

The Commission found it had jurisdiction under the Statutory Powers Procedure Act to lift the stay and granted the motion, noting that the appeal was not frivolous, the officer sought to serve his demotion immediately to avoid prejudice to future promotion opportunities, and the employer consented.

The appellant police officers appealed a conviction for discreditable conduct arising from a warrantless entry into a tenant's private residence while responding to a landlord-tenant dispute over unpaid rent.

The appellants argued the Hearing Officer failed to consider their good faith and intentions.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed the appeal, finding the Hearing Officer reasonably applied an objective test based on the reasonable expectations of the public, and correctly concluded that the officers' unauthorized entry constituted a trespass that would bring discredit to the police service.

The appellant police officer appealed a penalty of reduction in rank from sergeant to first-class constable for a minimum of one year, imposed after he pled guilty to three counts of discreditable conduct for misappropriating funds from a unit bank account.

The appellant argued the Hearing Officer misapprehended evidence regarding his repayment efforts, failed to consider his medical and personal circumstances, and imposed a disproportionate penalty.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed these grounds, finding the Hearing Officer's conclusions reasonable and the penalty within the acceptable range.

However, the Commission allowed the appeal in part to vary the wording of the penalty, finding that making reinstatement conditional on a Unit Commander's recommendation was problematic and lacked clear standards.

The penalty was varied to allow the appellant to participate in the normal promotional process after the one-year demotion.