Safety Law News for June 3, 2024

— In New York, the Supreme Court, Appellate Division affirmed the conviction of a student of assault in second and third degrees, arising out of incident in which a 19 year old, employed as a custodian, fired a school resource officer’s weapon and shot the officer in foot during physical struggle with officer.  The appellate court, in refusing to suppress statements that the custodian made to the officer while he was in custody ruled that not every comment made by a police officer in response to an inquiry by the defendant can be said to constitute an interrogation.  Volunteered statements are admissible provided the defendant spoke with genuine spontaneity.The court held that this case involves statements made after the police officer intervened while the custodian was on campus armed with a knife and was brandishing it toward himself and others.  When taken into custody, the custodian “spoke with genuine spontaneity and the statements were not the result of inducement, provocation, encouragement or acquiescence, no matter how subtly employed.”  People v. Franco

— In North Carolina, “the Hope Mills police chief and town manager are speaking out after the Cumberland County Sheriff decided to pull resource officers and crossing guards from the town’s public schools, as well as all other towns in Cumberland County.”  The Sheriff’s decision is based on “the sheriff’s staffing concerns for his own department.”

— In Wisconsin, the legislature enacted Assembly Bill 245, requiring “the deployment of 25 police officers in Milwaukee Public Schools.  A group of students are protesting the law, seeking a campus policy compromise that will “have school resource officers stationed somewhere discreetly on campuses but away from classrooms and buildings.”

— In Maryland, officials in the Carroll County’s public schools are announcing that “arrested students almost never face criminal prosecution.”  “When a student arrest is made, the case is referred to the Department of Juvenile Services for intake. DJS determines whether to drop the case, impose consequences, or to refer the case to the State’s Attorney’s Office for criminal charges. A lot of it gets resolved at intake.”