427 P.3d 423
Utah Ct. App.2018Background
- Heidi Palmer, an SGPD sergeant, investigated a reported cell-phone child-pornography matter, delayed completing the report for over two years, and left a CD with images unsecured in her desk.
- An internal affairs review led the Disciplinary Review Board to recommend demotion and an action plan; the Chief initially recommended demotion but ultimately the City Manager imposed a suspension of five days (40 hours) without pay and an action plan.
- Palmer attended a pre-disciplinary meeting but was told her attorney could not attend; she appealed the City Manager’s decision to the St. George City Council (Appeal Board).
- Before the appeal hearing Palmer requested evidence of comparable disciplinary actions in SGPD; the City refused and the Appeal Board never compelled production; the appeal hearing allotted one hour per side and produced a one-sentence decision upholding the suspension with no factual findings.
- Palmer challenged the process on due process grounds (right to counsel at pre-discipline, one-hour time limit, City Attorney advising both pre-discipline and appeal, refusal to disclose comparable discipline) and argued the Appeal Board abused its discretion by failing to make factual findings.
Issues
| Issue | Palmer’s Argument | Respondents’ Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Right to counsel at pre-disciplinary meeting | Palmer: statute (Utah Code §10-3-1106) entitles employees to counsel as soon as they are subject to discipline | City: statutory right to counsel attaches only after a final disciplinary decision and appeal is sought | Court: Held for City — no right to counsel at the pre-disciplinary meeting; statute grants counsel only after final decision |
| One-hour time limit at appeal hearing | Palmer: one-hour limit prevented calling witnesses and presenting her defense, violating due process | City: APA permits the presiding officer to regulate hearing course and duration; parties had opportunities and exhibits were admitted | Court: Held for City — one-hour per side was not an unreasonable due-process violation; no substantial prejudice shown |
| City Attorney advising both pre-discipline and Appeal Board | Palmer: dual role tainted impartiality; risk of bias required disqualification | City: attorney served advisory/investigative role, not prosecutorial/adjudicative; private counsel represented City at the hearing | Court: Held for City — no due-process violation; advisory role did not show disqualifying bias or prejudice |
| Refusal to disclose comparable discipline records | Palmer: denial prevented her from meeting burden to show disparate treatment and disproportionality; Appeal Board should have compelled production | City: comparable records not relevant to the internal investigation; could be obtained via GRAMA | Court: Held for Palmer — refusal to produce comparable-discipline evidence violated due process; remanded for production and new hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- Nelson v. Department of Employment Security, 801 P.2d 158 (Utah Ct. App.) (agencies not required to appoint counsel in administrative hearings absent statute)
- Fierro v. Park City Municipal Corp., 295 P.3d 696 (Utah Ct. App.) (due process challenges in administrative proceedings reviewed for correctness)
- Sierra Club v. Utah Solid & Hazardous Waste Control Board, 964 P.2d 335 (Utah Ct. App.) (agency may limit hearing time; limitations not unreasonable absent showing of prejudice)
- V-1 Oil Co. v. Department of Environmental Quality, 939 P.2d 1192 (Utah) (administrative functions divided into investigative, advocatory, adjudicative; combining advisory with adjudicative roles raises risk of bias)
- Kelly v. Salt Lake City Civil Service Commission, 8 P.3d 1048 (Utah Ct. App.) (on appeal board review: (1) do facts support charges; (2) do charges warrant sanction; employee bears burden to show meaningful disparity)
- Young v. Salt Lake County, 52 P.3d 1240 (Utah) (GRAMA appeals process and balancing of disclosure/privacy interests)
- Carlsen v. Board of Adjustment of City of Smithfield, 287 P.3d 440 (Utah Ct. App.) (discussion of disqualifying bias and partiality in administrative hearings)
- Hugoe v. Woods Cross City, 316 P.3d 979 (Utah Ct. App.) (agency failure to make adequate findings renders decision arbitrary and capricious)