Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1665 Filed 04/06/16 Page 1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5

IAFRATE & ASSOCIATES
649 North Second Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 234-9775
Michele M. Iafrate, #015115
miafrate@iafratelaw.com
Attorneys for Defendants Joseph M. Arpaio and
Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office

6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8

Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres, et al.

9

Plaintiffs,

10

vs.

11

Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,

12
13

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

NO. CV07-02513-PHX-GMS

DEFENDANT ARPAIO’S
RESPONSE TO THE COURT’S
IN-COURT QUESTION

In Court on March 1, 2016, the Court stated that it had a concern regarding

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

the dating on certain internal investigations. Specifically, the Court stated:
THE COURT: Well, I had one other concern with respect to your chart,
and that is as I compared it against other exhibits, it looked to me like Chief
Deputy Sheridan, in granting one of the grievances, backdated the date of
– backdated and recharacterized the date of the initial decision.
Is that normal procedure?
MS. IAFRATE Do you have –
THE COURT: Do you know what I’m talking about?
MS. IAFRATE: I do not. Do you have the IA number?
THE COURT: I don’t but I’ll get it for you.
MS. IAFRATE: Okay.
THE COURT: Just like I’m going to get the other document if you want to
address it.
MS. IAFRATE: If I had the IA number, I could go back to the source
documents to answer your question.
(Doc. 1644, 48:21- 49:10).

1

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1665 Filed 04/06/16 Page 2 of 3

1

After the hearing, the Court indicated that the investigations he was referring

2

to regarding Chief Sheridan were IA14-541 and IA14-542. After a review of the

3

source documents, undersigned counsel finds no date discrepancies as to IA14-

4
5
6

542. Furthermore, Chief Deputy Sheridan was not involved in IA14-542.
After a review of the source documents in IA14-541, undersigned counsel
finds that on May 26, 2015, Chief Lopez inadvertently signed the final findings;

7
8
9
10

however, this was premature because the pre-determination hearing had not
occurred. Therefore, Chief Lopez crossed out his signature and wrote “yet to be
determined.” (Exhibit 1). Following the hearing, Chief Lopez signed the final

11

findings on June 16, 2015. (Exhibit 2). On June 17, 2015, a written reprimand was

12

issued to Lieutenant Sousa from Chief Lopez. (Exhibit 3). On June 25, 2015, a

13

grievance was filed by Lieutenant Sousa. (Exhibit 4). On July 9, 2015, Chief Lopez

14

responded and did not rescind the written reprimand. (Exhibit 5). The response

15

was forwarded to Chief Deputy Sheridan on July 13, 2015. (Ex. 5). On July 28,

16

2015, the written reprimand was issued but revised slightly. (Exhibit 6).

17
18
19

There was no backdating by Chief Deputy Sheridan in either of the files
addressed by the Court in the March 1, 2016 hearing.
DATED this 6th day of April, 2016

20
21
22
23
24

IAFRATE & ASSOCIATES

By:

s/Michele M. Iafrate
Michele M. Iafrate
Attorney for Defendants Joseph M.
Arpaio and Maricopa County Sheriff’s
Office
2

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1665 Filed 04/06/16 Page 3 of 3

1

NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING AND CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

2
3
4

I certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court on
April 6, 2016, for filing and uploading to the CM/ECF system which will send
notification of such filing to all parties of record.

5
6
7

By:

s/Jill Lafornara

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

3