Opinion ID: 1194929
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: District Attorney as Policymaker; Issue of Fact or Law

Text: (8) Contrary to the conclusion of the Court of Appeal, it is settled that whether an official is a policymaker for a county is dependent on an analysis of state law, not fact. ( McMillian v. Monroe County, supra, 520 U.S. at p. ___ [117 S.Ct. at pp. 1736-1737] [inquiry of which entity an official represents when acting in a particular capacity dependent on an analysis of state law]; Jett v. Dallas Independent School Dist. (1989) 491 U.S. 701, 737 [109 S.Ct. 2702, 2724, 105 L.Ed.2d 598] [[T]he identification of those officials whose decisions represent the official policy of the local governmental unit is itself a legal question to be resolved by the trial judge before the case is submitted to the jury. (Original italics.)].) Rather, [r]eviewing the relevant legal materials, including state and local positive law, as well as `custom or usage having the force of law,' [citation], the trial judge must identify those officials or governmental bodies who speak with final policymaking authority for the local governmental actor concerning the action alleged to have caused the particular constitutional or statutory violation at issue. ( Jett v. Dallas Independent School Dist., supra, 491 U.S. at p. 737 [109 S.Ct. at p. 2724].) Once those officials who have the power to make official policy on a particular issue have been identified, it is for the jury to determine whether their decisions have caused the deprivation of rights at issue by policies which affirmatively command that it occur, [citation], or by acquiescence in a longstanding practice or custom which constitutes the `standard operating procedure' of the local governmental entity. ( Ibid., original italics.) This is not to say that state law can answer the question for us by, for example, simply labeling as a state official an official who clearly makes county policy. But our understanding of the actual function of a governmental official, in a particular area, will necessarily be dependent on the definition of the official's functions under relevant state law. ( McMillian v. Monroe County, supra, 520 U.S. at p. ___ [117 S.Ct. at p. 1737].) Moreover, we need not answer the question in some categorical, `all or nothing' manner. ( Ibid. ) The high court's cases on the liability of local governments under § 1983 instruct us to ask whether governmental officials are final policymakers for the local government in a particular area, or on a particular issue. ( Ibid. ) Thus, we are not seeking to make a characterization of [California district attorneys] that will hold true for every type of official action they engage in. ( Ibid. ) We simply consider whether Jagels represents the state or the County when preparing to prosecute and when prosecuting criminal violations of state law, and when training and developing policies for employees engaged in these activities.