Capping a six-year investigation, the Justice Department announced last week that Orange County California’s numerous law enforcement entities regularly denied criminal defendants their legal rights. The 63-page report said prosecutors and sheriffs in Orange County, California, regularly misused a jailhouse informant program to deny the constitutional rights of criminal defendants.

The Justice Department’s "pattern or practice” investigation was conducted by the Civil Rights Division and included digging into the routine behavior of the Orange County District Attorney's Office and the Orange County Sheriff's Department.

The Justice Department explains that a "pattern or practice" is found "when the evidence establishes that the discriminatory actions were the defendant's regular practice, rather than an isolated instance.”

Launched in December 2016, the sweeping investigation homed in on the tactics of Orange County law enforcement entities to use their ongoing jailhouse informant program by working with jailhouse informants, who may have been used improperly to collect incriminating statements about other criminal defendants.

The Justice Department’s scathing report says that between 2007 and 2016, law enforcement entities in Orange County violated the constitutional rights of all defendants to be represented by counsel, and denied the criminal defendants their 14th Amendment rights. The 14th Amendment guarantees defendants and their counsel the right to have full disclosure by law enforcement entities of any and all evidence that is exculpatory and may help them with their defense.

Simultaneously, the Justice Department said Orange County must implement changes, and that the systematic denial of criminal defendants’ rights was still ongoing today in Orange County.

Orange County law enforcement entities, the report says in conclusion, must offer clear disclosures to all defendants about the jailhouse informant program, and that "more work remains to be done."

The report states, ”Restoring trust in Orange County law enforcement will require recognition and remediation of the harms caused by the law enforcement practices described in this report.”

The Justice Department points out that the District Attorney’s office has not implemented the changes needed yet, even though they’ve known about it for eight years.

“It has been eight years since much of the misconduct came to light," the department noted, and the district attorney's office "has still not taken adequate steps to ensure that prosecutors understand and carry out their constitutional disclosure obligations.”

However, Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer disagreed with the statement that his office had not worked with the Justice Department and made changes. He also said that Orange County stopped using the jailhouse informant program in 2016.

Spitzer said he conducted his own outside investigation into the matter and then fired a senior prosecutor for failing to disclose information to a defense attorney.

"Throughout this multi-year investigation, I repeatedly asked the DOJ for input on the numerous reforms I have implemented, including the prohibition of utilizing a jail house informant without the express consent of the elected district attorney," said Spitzer.

Don Barnes, the Orange County Sheriff, said he believes they have incorporated many of the report’s recommended changes.

"I am confident they will find our current practices have addressed many of their recommendations, and anticipate a prompt and complete resolution to this matter," he said.

The Justice Department said it is negotiating with Orange County to create and implement reforms. In some cases, negative findings in “pattern or practice” investigations may end up in court.

The Department of Justice is authorized to sue local law enforcement agencies if they find a “pattern or practice” of violating citizens' rights.

For example, on December 12, 1999, the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against the State of New Jersey and its Division of State Police under 42 U.S.C. § 14141 in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey. The Justice Department alleged that “the defendants engaged in an unconstitutional pattern or practice of performing vehicle stops and searches of African American motorists traveling on New Jersey roadways, including the New Jersey Turnpike.”

The result of the litigation was a joint application for the entry of the consent decree, which included numerous changes implemented by the State of New Jersey and its Division of State Police. An independent monitor was created to oversee the changes.

The Justice Department is working with Orange County law enforcement entities, and there is no litigation planned as of today.