How Do You Subpoena a Retired Police Officer

[jytung]

My question involves an injury that occurred in the state of: California

This is involving a car accident where a client was injured. A police report written up by the CHP officer at the scene put the other party at fault. That was in 2008. This has come trial now and we would like to subpoena the CHP officer, but now that officer is retired from the department. How can we subpoena this officer to testify about the police report he wrote in 2008?

[cdwjava]

My question involves an injury that occurred in the state of: California

This is involving a car accident where a client was injured. A police report written up by the CHP officer at the scene put the other party at fault. That was in 2008. This has come trial now and we would like to subpoena the CHP officer, but now that officer is retired from the department. How can we subpoena this officer to testify about the police report he wrote in 2008?

You will have to try and track him down, hope he has not left the state, and issue the subpoena. I suppose it's time to hire a private investigator to see if he can be tracked down.

If the CHP officer is out of state, you an offer him transportation and room and board as an enticement to come back, but he may not be interested in doing so for a civil matter and you won't be able to compel him.

[Who'sThatGuy]

And you want to subpoena the retired CHP officer because he witnessed the accident with his own eyes and knows that the other party was at fault, or the retired CHP officer was the first officer on the scene that took the police report and under his findings he thinks the other party was at fault?

[cdwjava]

I have investigated more than 600 collisions and have been subpoenaed to civil court twice and never testified at all. If it is that big of a case, the insurance companies or attorneys will have hired their own people to reconstruct the scene and will not generally rely solely on the officer's opinion.

I can only presume the officer had an opinion that was contrary to the findings of one or the other party's legal representative in the case and the officer is wanted so as to defend his position. Personally, I doubt the retired officer will care, so I doubt he will be all that cooperative to come to court.

[KeyWestDan]

I would guess a police report in CA is as much inadmissible hearsay as it is in Florida.

[Who'sThatGuy]

Not arguing with you on this one but, what could an officer testify about if he did not witness the accident? He can only testify to what driver 1 told him, what driver 2 had told him, damage to both autos, road conditions, weather conditions and what his conclusion was to whom contributed to the accident. It doesn't mean that his conclusion is correct.

Who would be more creditable to the judge, the officer that arrived at the scene 10 minutes after the fact and took a report or an eye witness who happens to be a high school drop out?

What if this officer believes that driver number 1 was at fault but the eye witness states that driver number 2 was at fault.

What I'm getting at is, sending a subpoena out to someone that wasn't an eye witness is 99 times out of 100 a waste of everyone's time.

It would be like when an officer writes a careless driving infraction to a driver that was involved in a 2 car MVA. If the officer shows for court and the driver that was not issued a ticket skips court, the ticketed driver gets a free pass.

[cdwjava]

Not arguing with you on this one but, what could an officer testify about if he did not witness the accident? He can only testify to what driver 1 told him, what driver 2 had told him, damage to both autos, road conditions, weather conditions and what his conclusion was to whom contributed to the accident. It doesn't mean that his conclusion is correct.

It depends on the extent of the investigation. Many CHP officers are sufficiently trained as to be able to enter an expert opinion as to the cause of a collision at court. I can do the same thing. With sufficient training and experience the officer can be permitted to testify as an expert (i.e. offer his expert opinion as to the cause of the collision).

An effective case will include all the parties. And a good investigator will have taken all the statements into account in evaluating the scene and determining fault. But, not all officers are trained the same way and not all will render a well-supported opinion as to fault in a collision. But, if you are trying to fight a civil case as either plaintiff or defendant you would likely want to get any opinion that sided with your interpretation, or, that contradicted the other side's. Not sure what the need is here, but there might be one.

Like I said, 600 collisions and two subpoenas and no testimony (in civil trials ... several in criminal ones).

What if this officer believes that driver number 1 was at fault but the eye witness states that driver number 2 was at fault.

Chances are the officer will have some objective proof to support the claim. Many times the witnesses are wrong as to who was at "fault," but may be very much correct about the facts. Fault is not always what it seems just as the party that rear ends another is not always at fault for the collision - there can be other circumstances that change the initial impression.

What I'm getting at is, sending a subpoena out to someone that wasn't an eye witness is 99 times out of 100 a waste of everyone's time.

It depends on the purpose. It is not necessary to use the officer to get the collision report into evidence because both sides in a civil (or criminal) case can stipulate as to the report being an accurate copy of the officer's report, for good or ill. That is why the officer is rarely needed in these matters. Using the data and information in the report, each side will have their own experts spin things to come to, possibly, other conclusions.

Why the officer might be wanted for the trial is something I'd like to know because it may not be necessary at all. But, if his opinion is valuable to the OP because it bolsters his position, then I can understand it. But, he had better learn what he can about the officer's experience and training in collisions before he calls him as an expert and finds that he is the least capable or trained officer in the CHP.

[DaveJames]

I'm in a similar boat and am debating whether I should pay $16 for an accident report to strengthen my case when I send a demand letter to the other driver's insurance company. The other drive slid through a stop sign in the ice and hit me.

Now the report although a hearsay account may have specific information about the statements that each driver gave to the police. And if the driver at fault changed his story or told only part of the truth, the officer may be able to testify what he was told by each driver to make present and past statements consistent.

In my case, the other driver could have said something to his insurance company to defend himself although I had no stop sign and he did. I can't go into that until my case/claim is closed. If he did think of it, the police report would contradict him though but the insurance could really play a tough game of hardball.

Other than that, I can't see much else.

[cdwjava]

I'm in a similar boat and am debating whether I should pay $16 for an accident report to strengthen my case when I send a demand letter to the other driver's insurance company. The other drive slid through a stop sign in the ice and hit me.

You might want the report so that you know what it has to say. Chances are the other insurance company already has it.

Now the report although a hearsay account may have specific information about the statements that each driver gave to the police. And if the driver at fault changed his story or told only part of the truth, the officer may be able to testify what he was told by each driver to make present and past statements consistent.

That might be useful. But, if it goes to court, the officer would have to be called upon to testify as to what he was told.

[DaveJames]

"You might want the report so that you know what it has to say. Chances are the other insurance company already has it. "

Thanks I see I need a possible trump card too.

Good point.