Case: 2002 DOJ Investigation of Cleveland Division of Police

No Court Case | No Court

Filed Date: 2000

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In 2000, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) opened an investigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §14141 of the Cleveland Division of Police (CDP) into allegations of a pattern or practice of unconstitutional conduct. After a two year investigation, which included the review of CDP use of deadly force and use of non-deadly force investigations from 1998-2000, the DOJ issued a formal technical assistance letter dated July 23, 2002. The letter identified recommended reforms in the following areas: th…

In 2000, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) opened an investigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §14141 of the Cleveland Division of Police (CDP) into allegations of a pattern or practice of unconstitutional conduct. After a two year investigation, which included the review of CDP use of deadly force and use of non-deadly force investigations from 1998-2000, the DOJ issued a formal technical assistance letter dated July 23, 2002. The letter identified recommended reforms in the following areas: the use of force, misconduct complaint investigations, risk management, traffic stop procedures, and training.

The scope of the DOJ investigation was subsequently expanded to include conditions of confinement at the Central Prison Unit and district police station holding facilities. On June 4, 2003, the DOJ issued a technical assistance letter which set forth its recommendations to correct conditions faced by police detainees, including: suicide prevention, medical care, fire safety, security and administration practices, and environmental health and safety.

On February 9, 2004, the DOJ and the CDP reached a formal agreement to conclude the DOJ's investigation of the CDP's use of deadly force. The agreement was set to terminate one year after the effective date provided that compliance was achieved as to all provisions.

On May 12, 2004, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Agreement regarding the CDP holding-cell facilities. The duration of the agreement was three years, during which time the DOJ would oversee and monitor the implementation of the reforms as specified by the agreement.

A spreadsheet describing all of the DOJ 14141 investigations shows this case as closed as of March 15, 2005. When the DOJ opened a new investigation into policing in Cleveland (See U.S. v. Cleveland, PN-OH-0008>/a> in this Clearinghouse), the "background" section of its report doesn't mention this one. We conclude that it closed.

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (1/17/2007)

Jessica Kincaid (3/29/2015)

Saeeda Joseph-Charles (11/17/2016)

Related Cases

United States v. City of Cleveland, Northern District of Ohio (2015)

People


Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Acosta, R. Alexander (District of Columbia)

Brown Cutlar, Shanetta Y. (District of Columbia)

Gunston, Emily A. (District of Columbia)

Henderson, John A. (District of Columbia)

Heyer, Michelle L (Ohio)

Masling, Mark S. (District of Columbia)

Morse, Thomas Jackson (District of Columbia)

Ogletree, Rashida J (District of Columbia)

Preston, Judith (Judy) C. (District of Columbia)

Rendon, Carole S. (Ohio)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Acosta, R. Alexander (District of Columbia)

Brown Cutlar, Shanetta Y. (District of Columbia)

Gunston, Emily A. (District of Columbia)

Henderson, John A. (District of Columbia)

Heyer, Michelle L (Ohio)

Masling, Mark S. (District of Columbia)

Morse, Thomas Jackson (District of Columbia)

Ogletree, Rashida J (District of Columbia)

Preston, Judith (Judy) C. (District of Columbia)

Rendon, Carole S. (Ohio)

Rosenbaum, Steven H. (District of Columbia)

Schlozman, Bradley (District of Columbia)

Sweeney, Emily M. (Ohio)

Volosin, Heather Tonsing (Ohio)

Weiss, Daniel H. (District of Columbia)

White, Gregory A. (Ohio)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Chandra, Subodh (Ohio)

Langhenry, Barabara A. (Ohio)

Scott, Joseph F. (Ohio)

Singletary, Gary S. (Ohio)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Re: Investigation of the Cleveland Division of Police

2002 DOJ Investigation of Cleveland Division of Police

July 23, 2002

July 23, 2002

Findings Letter/Report

Re: Investigation of Cleveland Division of Police Central Prison Unit and Holding Cell Facilities

2002 DOJ Investigation of Cleveland Division of Police

June 4, 2003

June 4, 2003

Findings Letter/Report

Agreement to Conclude DOJ’s Investigation of the Cleveland Division of Police’s Use of Deadly Force

2002 DOJ Investigation of Cleveland Division of Police

Feb. 9, 2004

Feb. 9, 2004

Settlement Agreement

Memorandum of Agreement Between the United States Department of Justice and the City of Cleveland Regarding Holding Cell Facilities Operated by the Cleveland Division of Police

May 12, 2004

May 12, 2004

Settlement Agreement

Resources

Docket

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: Ohio

Case Type(s):

Policing

Key Dates

Filing Date: 2000

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Department of Justice

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Cleveland Division of Police (Cleveland, Ohio), City

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Law-enforcement

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act, 34 U.S.C. § 12601 (previously 42 U.S.C. § 14141)

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Unreasonable search and seizure

Special Case Type(s):

Out-of-court

Availably Documents:

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Private Settlement Agreement

Order Duration: 2004 - 2007

Content of Injunction:

Monitoring

Issues

General:

Conditions of confinement

Excessive force

Failure to train

Inadequate citizen complaint investigations and procedures

Pattern or Practice

Racial profiling