Item 3B1City of Southlake, Texas
Department of Public Safety
RACIAL PROFILING REPORT
2010
.
� Are
+� • ��
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary ....................................................................................... ...............................
3
Introduction.................................................................................................... ...............................
4
Southlake Department of Public Safety Policy on Racial Profiling .......... ...............................
5
2010 Analysis of Traffic Stops ...................................................................... ...............................
7
2010 Analysis of Persons Searched ............................................................... ...............................
8
2006 -2010 Comparative Analysis of Traffic Stops ...................................... ...............................
9
2006 -2009 Comparison of Persons Searched ............................................. ...............................
11
DataCollection Issues .................................................................................. ...............................
13
AppendixA ................................................................................................... ...............................
15
Art. 3.05. Racial Profiling ........................................................................ ...............................
15
AppendixB ................................................................................................... ...............................
26
2
Executive Summary
Articles 2.131 — 2.138 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure require the annual reporting to
the local governing body and TCLEOSE of data collected on the race or ethnicity of individuals
stopped and issued citations or arrested for traffic violations and whether or not those individuals
were searched. This is the seventh year requiring such report. The data for the report was
obtained from the Racial Profiling Report component of the Municipal Court software program.
Beginning this year Texas law enforcement agencies are also required to submit the racial
profiling report to the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education
( TCLEOSE) website by March 1 each year. This is the reason for the change in name of our
annual report from a citizen contact report to a racial profiling report. This year a requirement
was added to include data in the report for persons of Middle Eastern heritage as well.
The analysis of material and data from the Southlake Department of Public Safety revealed the
following:
The analysis of statistical information from SDPS reveals that there are no
indications of systemic racial profiling by the department.
The SDPS is in compliance with applicable Texas law concerning the prohibition of
racial profiling.
Introduction
This report details an analysis of the Southlake Department of Public Safety's statistical
information on racial profiling for the calendar year 2010. According to the State of Texas, race
means "of a particular descent, including Caucasian, African, Hispanic, Asian or Native
American descent ".
This report has been prepared to specifically comply with Article 2.131 — 2.138 of the Texas
Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the compilation and analysis of racial profiling data.
Because all Southlake DPS Patrol vehicles have cameras for the recording of traffic stops,
Southlake is exempt from the more rigorous reporting requirements of section 2.134. The full
copies of the applicable laws and regulations pertaining to this report are contained in Appendix
A.
This report is divided into five analytical sections: SDPS's policy on racial profiling; SDPS's
training and education on racial profiling; SDPS's complaint process and public education on
racial profiling; and analysis of statistical data on racial profiling.
For the purposes of this report and analysis, the State of Texas defines racial profiling as follows:
A law enforcement - initiated action based on an individual's race, ethnicity, or national origin
rather than on the individual's behavior or on information identifying the individual as having
engaged in criminal activity (Texas CCP Article 3.05).
The demographic information contained in this report was taken from the demographic profile
from the 2000 National Census. Southlake demographic information was compared to both
county and regional information for analytical and comparison purposes. The region is defined
by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) as a sixteen county region
centered around Dallas and Fort Worth.
M
Southlake Department of Public Safety Policy on Racial Profiling
A review of SDPS General Orders (GO) and Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) revealed that
the department has adopted policies to be in compliance with Article 2.132 of the Texas Code of
Criminal Procedure. There are seven specific requirements mandated by Article 2.132 that a law
enforcement agency must address. All seven are clearly covered in Departmental General
Orders or Standard Operating Procedures. The General Orders and SOPS provide clear direction
that any form of racial profiling is prohibited and that officers found engaging in inappropriate
profiling may be disciplined, up to and including, termination. The General Orders and SOPs
also provide a very clear statement of the agency's philosophy regarding equal treatment of all
persons regardless of race, ethnicity, or social status. Appendix B lists the applicable statute and
corresponding General Orders or Police Standard Operating Procedures. Specifically however,
Police SOP 121.03 states:
121.03.1 Profilin Prohibited
A. Peace Officers of the City of Southlake are strictly prohibited from engaging in any form
of inappropriate profiling.
B. The prohibition against inappropriate profiling does not preclude the use of race,
ethnicity, or national origin factors in a detention decision by a peace officer when such
factors are used as part of a description of a suspect or witness for whom the officer is
searching.
C. Officers refrain from stopping, detaining, searching, arresting, or taking any enforcement
action including seizure or forfeiture activities, against any person based solely on the
person's race, national origin, citizenship, religion, ethnicity, age, gender, color, creed,
sexual orientation, disability or economic status.
Southlake Department of Public Safety Training and Education on Racial
Profiling
Texas Occupation Code § 1701.253 and § 1701.402 require that curriculum be established and
training certificates issued on racial profiling for all Texas Peace officers. All officers have
completed the TCLEOSE required training on Racial Profiling and Asset Forfeiture.
E
Southlake Department of Public Safety Complaint Process and Public
Education on Racial Profiling
Article 2.132 §2(b)3 -4 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure requires that law enforcement
agencies implement a complaint process on racial profiling and that the agency provide public
education on the complaint process. The department has prepared a brochure on the citizen
complaint process which includes a specific section on racial profiling. The brochure is clearly
written and provides detailed information on the process and whom to contact to file a complaint.
In addition, the department has posted specific information about racial profiling on their website
which is easily accessible.
Southlake Department of Public Safety Statistical Data on Racial Profiling
Article 2.132(b)6 requires that law enforcement agencies collect statistical information on traffic
stops and detentions with specific information on the race of the person stopped. In addition,
information concerning searches of persons and whether or not the search was based on consent
or probable cause is also collected.
0
2010 Analysis of Traffic Stops
Southlake Police Officers issued a total of 13,216 citations for 15,870 violations in 2010, a slight
decrease from the 16,202 violations cited during 2009. The table below depicts the percentages
of people detained by race. As can be seen, Caucasians were detained in lower numbers than in
the population of the city, but in a larger percentage than in the county or regional population.
Hispanics were detained in lower percentage figures than both their Southlake and regional
population figures. All other groups the numbers of detainees were slightly higher than their
percentage in the city, but much lower in comparison with their numbers in the county or the
regional populations. The county and regional population data was gathered from the 2000
census which is the most recent census and demographic information available.
2010- Total Violations Cited 15,870
The above figures are not surprising due to the amount of through traffic created as a result of
having three state highways in the city. Our city also attracts a number of non - residential visitors
due to the abundant shopping choices in Southlake Town Square. The above figures are not
indicative of racial profiling on the part of the Southlake Police Services. Officers do not stop
only city residents during traffic enforcement and the major thoroughfares bring county,
regional, and out -of -state residents through the city in high numbers. To appropriately evaluate
the data, one must use a number of measures. The use of county and regional population data is
most appropriate because these residents would have the highest likelihood, in addition to
Southlake residents, of using Southlake roadways. Using the city, county and 16 county regional
population data, percentage of traffic stops by race appear both expected and understandable.
The citation data also shows that a significantly lower percentage of minorities than are present
in the county or regional populations were issued citations; therefore the combining of local and
regional numbers indicates a fair balance in traffic enforcement data.
7
Middle
Native
Other/
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
East
American
Unknown
Total Citations
Issued
13,384
330
435
810
2
9
900
Percent Issued
84.3%
2.07%
2.7%
5.1%
0.0%
0.0%
5.67%
Southlake
Population
96.5%
1.8%
3.7%
1.4%
0.8%
0.2%
N/A
Tarrant
Population
71.2%
3.6%
19.7%
12.8%
9.1%
0.6%
N/A
Regional
Population
59.5%
3.8%
21.4%
13.6%
9.9%
0.6%
N/A
The above figures are not surprising due to the amount of through traffic created as a result of
having three state highways in the city. Our city also attracts a number of non - residential visitors
due to the abundant shopping choices in Southlake Town Square. The above figures are not
indicative of racial profiling on the part of the Southlake Police Services. Officers do not stop
only city residents during traffic enforcement and the major thoroughfares bring county,
regional, and out -of -state residents through the city in high numbers. To appropriately evaluate
the data, one must use a number of measures. The use of county and regional population data is
most appropriate because these residents would have the highest likelihood, in addition to
Southlake residents, of using Southlake roadways. Using the city, county and 16 county regional
population data, percentage of traffic stops by race appear both expected and understandable.
The citation data also shows that a significantly lower percentage of minorities than are present
in the county or regional populations were issued citations; therefore the combining of local and
regional numbers indicates a fair balance in traffic enforcement data.
7
2010 Analysis of Persons Searched
The table below reports the summaries for the total number of persons searched subsequent to
being stopped by SDPS for traffic offenses and either cited to court or arrested. Individuals are
searched after being stopped for a variety of reasons. As can be seen, a very small portion of the
detainees were searched after being stopped.
2010- Total Citations 13,216
0
Middle
Native
Other/
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
East
American
Unknown
Total Detained
11,119
274
300
638
2
7
876
Total
Searched
115
3
5
13
1 0
0
0
Percent
Searched
1.03%
1.09%
1.67%
2.03%
0.0%
0%
0.0%
Searched
incident to
Arrest
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
Searched by
Consent
37
3
0
7
0
0
0
Searched due
to Probable
Cause
1 51
1 0
1 5
6
0
1 0
1 0
0
2006 -2010 Comparative Analysis of Traffic Stops
For comparison, Police Services has included an analysis from 2006 through 2010 traffic stops.
Southlake Police Officers issued a total of 13,648 citations during 2006 compared to a total of
12,408 in 2007, 12,653 in 2008, 13,253 in 2009, and 13,216 in 2010. As can be seen, Caucasians
were detained in slightly lower numbers than in the population of the city, but in a larger
percentage than in the county or regional population in each of the five comparative years.
Hispanics were typically detained in lower numbers than the Southlake and regional populations,
and African - Americans were detained in numbers slightly higher than their percentage in the
city, but lower in comparison with their numbers in the county or the regional populations. This
comparison indicates that Southlake police officers do not use bias based policing.
2006- Total Citations 13.648
2007- Total Citations 12.408
Native
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
Other
American
Unknown
Total Citations
Issued
11,501
196
725
684
151
2
389
Percent Issued
84.2%
1.4%
5.3%
5.0%
1.1%
.01%
2.8%
Southlake
Population
94.5%
1.8%
3.7%
1.4%
0.8%
0.2%
N/A
Tarrant
Population
71.2%
3.6%
19.7%
12.8%
9.1%
0.6%
N/A
Regional
Population
59.5%
3.8%
21.4%
13.6%
9.9%
0.6%
N/A
2007- Total Citations 12.408
9
Native
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
Other
American
Unknown
Total Citations
Issued
10,331
237
726
592
176
6
340
Percent Issued
83.3%
1.9%
5.9%
4.8%
1.4%
.04%
2.7%
Southlake
Population
96.5%
1.8%
3.7%
1.4%
0.8%
0.2%
N/A
Tarrant
Population
71.2%
3.6%
19.7%
12.8%
9.1%
0.6%
N/A
Regional
Population
59.5%
3.8%
21.4%
13.6%
9.9%
0.6%
N/A
9
2008- Total Violations Cited 12,653
2009- Total Violations Cited 16,202
Middle
Native
Other/
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
Other
American
Unknown
Total Citations
Issued
10,492
223
732
677
172
5
393
Percent Issued
82.9%
1.7%
5.8%
5.3%
1.4%
.04%
3.1%
Southlake
Population
96.5%
1.8%
3.7%
1.4%
0.8%
0.2%
N/A
Tarrant
Population
71.2%
3.6%
19.7%
12.8%
9.1%
0.6%
N/A
Regional
Population
59.5%
3.8%
21.4%
13.6%
9.9%
0.6%
N/A
2009- Total Violations Cited 16,202
2010- Total Violations Cited 15,870
Middle
Native
Other/
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
Other
American
Unknown
Total Citations
Issued
14,152
291
479
745
162
2
371
Percent Issued
87.3%
1.8%
2.9%
4.6%
1.0.%
0%
2.3%
Southlake
Population
96.5%
1.8%
3.7%
1.4%
0.8%
0.2%
N/A
Tarrant
Population
71.2%
3.6%
19.7%
12.8%
9.1%
0.6%
N/A
Regional
Population
59.5%
3.8%
21.4%
13.6%
9.9%
0.6%
N/A
2010- Total Violations Cited 15,870
10
Middle
Native
Other/
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
East
American
Unknown
Total Citations
Issued
13,384
330
435
810
2
9
900
Percent Issued
84.3%
2.07%
2.7%
5.1%
0.0%
0.0%
5.67%
Southlake
Population
96.5%
1.8%
3.7%
1.4%
0.8%
0.2%
0.8%
Tarrant
Population
71.2%
3.6%
19.7%
12.8%
9.1%
0.6%
9.1%
Regional
Population
59.5%
3.8%
21.4%
13.6%
9.9%
0.6%
9.9%
10
2006 -2009 Comparison of Persons Searched
The table below reports the summaries for the total number of persons searched subsequent to
being stopped by SDPS for traffic offenses and either cited to appear in court or arrested. For
comparison, the 2006 through 2010 information is listed below. There has been a significant
decrease in the number of persons searched since 2006 where 219 persons were searched. In
2007 the number was 45, in 2008 131, in 2009 160, and in 2010 136. There is no clear indicator
for the reason(s) for the decrease in searches. We have increased training on Arrest, Search, and
Seizure laws in the past two years which may have led to the reduction.
In general, individuals are searched after being stopped for a variety of reasons. Officers may be
concerned for their personal safety (the possibility of a weapon), they may have probable cause
that a crime has been committed and the person stopped is concealing evidence of the crime, or
they may have a suspicion of a criminal offense and request consent from the person to search
the person or vehicle.
2006- Total Citations 13.648
2007- Total Citations 12.408
Native
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
Other
American
Unknown
Total Detained
11,501
196
725
684
151
2
389
Total
Searched
196
4
3
16
1 0
0
0
Percent
Searched
1.7%
2.0%
0.4%
2.3%
0%
0%
0%
Searched with
Probable
Cause
148
2
3
14
0
0
0
Searched by
1
Consent
48
2
0
2
0
0
0
2007- Total Citations 12.408
11
Native
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
Other
American
Unknown
Total Detained
10,331
237
726
592
176
6
340
Total
Searched
40
0
2
3
1 0
0
0
Percent
Searched
0.4%
0%
0.2%
0.5%
0%
0%
0%
Searched with
Probable
Cause
30
0
1
3
0
0
0
Searched by
1
Consent
10
2
1
0
0
0
0
11
2008- Total Citations 10,027
2009- Total Citations 13,253
Native
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
Other
American
Unknown
Total Detained
8329
189
467
518
132
5
387
Total
Searched
113
0
13
3
1 2
0
0
Percent
Searched
1.3%
0%
2.7%
0.5%
1.5%
0%
0%
Searched
incident to
Arrest
51
0
7
1
0
0
0
Searched by
Consent
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
Searched due
to Probable
Cause
48
0
8
2
2
0
0
2009- Total Citations 13,253
12
Native
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
Other
American
Unknown
Total Detained
11,600
245
312
597
127
2
370
Total
Searched
138
1
9
10
1 1
0
1
Percent
Searched
1.2%
0.4%
2.9%
1.7%
0.7%
0%
0.2%
Searched
incident to
Arrest
66
0
6
5
0
0
0
Searched by
Consent
24
1
1
0
0
0
0
Searched due
to Probable
Cause
48
0
2
5
1
0
1
12
2010- Total Citations 13.216
Analysis of Racial Profiling Compliance by Southlake Department of Public
Safety
The analysis of the data regarding traffic citations and searches indicates that SDPS is fully in
compliance with all relevant Texas law concerning racial profiling. Data on traffic stops
revealed that Hispanics and African- Americans are stopped in numbers slightly higher than the
city population, but much lower than the county or regional population with the opposite being
true for Caucasians. This is a reasonable expectation due to the fact that Southlake officers do
not just issue citations to Southlake residents. State Highway 114 and FM 1709 funnel residents
from the entire region through Southlake and it is reasonable to assume that these individuals
commit a portion of the traffic violations viewed by officers. In addition, while the small
numbers confound statistical analysis, the data does demonstrate that searches of drivers are not
significantly different when examining race. Given the small number of searches of minorities,
no evidence exists that would suggest any selective targeting of minorities.
Coding of traffic citations showed that officers knew the race of the person prior to initiating a
traffic stop in 13 of the 13,253 cases. This clearly indicates that race is not a determining factor
in making the initial decision to stop. Police Services received one complaint of racial profiling
during 2009. The internal affairs investigation unfounded the allegation.
Data Collection Issues
There are a variety of issues with any data collected on racial profiling. First, although the law
mandates collection, there is not a standardized method of collecting data or what the data should
entail. Hence, there is wide variation in the reporting by law enforcement across the state.
Second, the determination of race is sometimes difficult and, at best a guessing game. Currently,
race is not on a person's driver's license. In addition, police usually refrain from asking a
13
Middle
Native
Other/
Caucasian
Asian
Hispanic
African
East
American
Unknown
Total Detained
11,119
274
300
638
2
7
876
Total
Searched
115
3
5
13
1 0
0
0
Percent
Searched
1.03%
1.09%
1.67%
2.03%
0.0%
0%
0.0%
Searched
incident to
Arrest
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
Searched by
Consent
37
3
0
7
0
0
0
Searched due
to Probable
Cause
1 51
1 0
1 5
6
0
1 0
1 0
Analysis of Racial Profiling Compliance by Southlake Department of Public
Safety
The analysis of the data regarding traffic citations and searches indicates that SDPS is fully in
compliance with all relevant Texas law concerning racial profiling. Data on traffic stops
revealed that Hispanics and African- Americans are stopped in numbers slightly higher than the
city population, but much lower than the county or regional population with the opposite being
true for Caucasians. This is a reasonable expectation due to the fact that Southlake officers do
not just issue citations to Southlake residents. State Highway 114 and FM 1709 funnel residents
from the entire region through Southlake and it is reasonable to assume that these individuals
commit a portion of the traffic violations viewed by officers. In addition, while the small
numbers confound statistical analysis, the data does demonstrate that searches of drivers are not
significantly different when examining race. Given the small number of searches of minorities,
no evidence exists that would suggest any selective targeting of minorities.
Coding of traffic citations showed that officers knew the race of the person prior to initiating a
traffic stop in 13 of the 13,253 cases. This clearly indicates that race is not a determining factor
in making the initial decision to stop. Police Services received one complaint of racial profiling
during 2009. The internal affairs investigation unfounded the allegation.
Data Collection Issues
There are a variety of issues with any data collected on racial profiling. First, although the law
mandates collection, there is not a standardized method of collecting data or what the data should
entail. Hence, there is wide variation in the reporting by law enforcement across the state.
Second, the determination of race is sometimes difficult and, at best a guessing game. Currently,
race is not on a person's driver's license. In addition, police usually refrain from asking a
13
person's race. The law allows the officer to use their perception to determine race or to ask the
persons race. To minimize conflict, the officers often use their perception based on appearance
and surname.
Finally, the law provides no standards by which to compare the data collected. It only states that
a report will be provided to the legislative body. If a comparison is to be made, any statistics
gathered must be compared to a variety of other measures and must take into account regional
and city variations. For example, this report compared Southlake statistics with both Tarrant
County and regional statistics to attempt to show that although Southlake is primarily populated
by Caucasians; while the percentages of population vary greatly for the county and the region.
City population statistics do not take into account the effect that a major arterial roadway
connecting the region will have on the demographics of the motoring public traveling through
the city.
The Southlake Department of Public Safety is committed to providing police services in a fair
and bias free manner. Southlake Police Officers are some of the finest and most well trained
officers in the region and are committed to avoiding any form of bias based policing. Our
mission remains to provide the highest level of professional police and emergency services,
dedicating ourselves to protecting life and property, while maintaining the highest ethical
standards.
14
Appendix A
Racial Profiling Statutes and Laws
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Art. 3.05. Racial Profiling
In this code, "racial profiling" means a law enforcement - initiated action based on an individual's
race, ethnicity, or national origin rather than on the individual's behavior or on information
identifying the individual as having engaged in criminal activity.
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, § 2, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Art. 2.131. RACIAL PROFILING PROHIBITED.
A peace officer may not engage in racial profiling.
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Art. 2.132. LAW ENFORCEMENT POLICY ON RACIAL PROFILING.
(a) In this article:
(1) "Law enforcement agency" means an agency of the state, or of a county,
municipality, or other political subdivision of the state, that employs peace officers who make
motor vehicle stops in the routine performance of the officers' official duties.
(2) "Motor vehicle stop" means an occasion in which a peace officer stops a
motor vehicle for an alleged violation of a law or ordinance.
(3) "Race or ethnicity" means of a particular descent, including Caucasian,
African, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, or Middle Eastern descent.
(b) Each law enforcement agency in this state shall adopt a detailed written policy on
racial profiling. The policy must:
(1) clearly define acts constituting racial profiling;
(2) strictly prohibit peace officers employed by the agency from engaging in
racial profiling;
(3) implement a process by which an individual may file a complaint with the
agency if the individual believes that a peace officer employed by the agency has engaged in
racial profiling with respect to the individual;
(4) provide public education relating to the agency's complaint process;
15
(5) require appropriate corrective action to be taken against a peace officer
employed by the agency who, after an investigation, is shown to have engaged in racial profiling
in violation of the agency's policy adopted under this article;
(6) require collection of information relating to motor vehicle stops in which a
citation is issued and to arrests made as a result of those stops, including information relating to:
(A) the race or ethnicity of the individual detained;
(B) whether a search was conducted and, if so, whether the individual
detained consented to the search; and
(C) whether the peace officer knew the race or ethnicity of the individual
detained before detaining that individual; and
(7) require the chief administrator of the agency, regardless of whether the
administrator is elected, employed, or appointed, to submit an annual report of the information
collected under Subdivision (6) to:
(A) the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and
Education; and
(B) the governing body of each county or municipality served by the
agency, if the agency is an agency of a county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the
state.
(c) The data collected as a result of the reporting requirements of this article shall not
constitute prima facie evidence of racial profiling.
(d) On adoption of a policy under Subsection (b), a law enforcement agency shall
examine the feasibility of installing video camera and transmitter - activated equipment in each
agency law enforcement motor vehicle regularly used to make motor vehicle stops and
transmitter - activated equipment in each agency law enforcement motorcycle regularly used to
make motor vehicle stops. If a law enforcement agency installs video or audio equipment as
provided by this subsection, the policy adopted by the agency under Subsection (b) must include
standards for reviewing video and audio documentation.
(e) A report required under Subsection (b)(7) may not include identifying information
about a peace officer who makes a motor vehicle stop or about an individual who is stopped or
arrested by a peace officer. This subsection does not affect the collection of information as
required by a policy under Subsection (b)(6).
(f) On the commencement of an investigation by a law enforcement agency of a
complaint described by Subsection (b)(3) in which a video or audio recording of the occurrence
on which the complaint is based was made, the agency shall promptly provide a copy of the
recording to the peace officer who is the subject of the complaint on written request by the
officer.
16
(g) On a finding by the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and
Education that the chief administrator of a law enforcement agency intentionally failed to submit
a report required under Subsection (b)(7), the commission shall begin disciplinary procedures
against the chief administrator.
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Amended by:
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R. S., Ch. 1172 Sec. 25, eff. September 1, 2009.
Art. 2.133. REPORTS REQUIRED FOR MOTOR VEHICLE STOPS.
(a) In this article, "race or ethnicity" has the meaning assigned by Article 2.132(a).
(b) A peace officer who stops a motor vehicle for an alleged violation of a law or
ordinance shall report to the law enforcement agency that employs the officer information
relating to the stop, including:
(1) a physical description of any person operating the motor vehicle who is
detained as a result of the stop, including:
(A) the person's gender; and
(B) the person's race or ethnicity, as stated by the person or, if the person
does not state the person's race or ethnicity, as determined by the officer to the best of the
officer's ability;
(2) the initial reason for the stop;
(3) whether the officer conducted a search as a result of the stop and, if so,
whether the person detained consented to the search;
(4) whether any contraband or other evidence was discovered in the course of
the search and a description of the contraband or evidence;
(5) the reason for the search, including whether:
(A) any contraband or other evidence was in plain view;
(B) any probable cause or reasonable suspicion existed to perform the
search; or
(C) the search was performed as a result of the towing of the motor
vehicle or the arrest of any person in the motor vehicle;
(6) whether the officer made an arrest as a result of the stop or the search,
including a statement of whether the arrest was based on a violation of the Penal Code, a
violation of a traffic law or ordinance, or an outstanding warrant and a statement of the offense
charged;
(7) the street address or approximate location of the stop; and
17
(8) whether the officer issued a written warning or a citation as a result of the
stop.
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Amended by:
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R. S., Ch. 1172 Sec. 26, eff. September 1, 2009.
Art. 2.134. COMPILATION AND ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION COLLECTED.
(a) In this article:
(1) "Motor vehicle stop" has the meaning assigned by Article 2.132(a).
(2) "Race or ethnicity" has the meaning assigned by Article 2.132(a).
(b) A law enforcement agency shall compile and analyze the information contained in
each report received by the agency under Article 2.133. Not later than March 1 of each year,
each law enforcement agency shall submit a report containing the incident -based data compiled
during the previous calendar year to the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and
Education and, if the law enforcement agency is a local law enforcement agency, to the
governing body of each county or municipality served by the agency.
(c) A report required under Subsection (b) must be submitted by the chief administrator
of the law enforcement agency, regardless of whether the administrator is elected, employed, or
appointed, and must include:
(1) a comparative analysis of the information compiled under Article 2.133 to:
(A) evaluate and compare the number of motor vehicle stops, within the
applicable jurisdiction, of persons who are recognized as racial or ethnic minorities and persons
who are not recognized as racial or ethnic minorities; and
(B) examine the disposition of motor vehicle stops made by officers
employed by the agency, categorized according to the race or ethnicity of the affected persons, as
appropriate, including any searches resulting from stops within the applicable jurisdiction; and
(2) information relating to each complaint filed with the agency alleging that a
peace officer employed by the agency has engaged in racial profiling.
(d) A report required under Subsection (b) may not include identifying information
about a peace officer who makes a motor vehicle stop or about an individual who is stopped or
arrested by a peace officer. This subsection does not affect the reporting of information required
under Article 2.133(b)(1).
(e) The Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education, in
accordance with Section 1701.162, Occupations Code, shall develop guidelines for compiling
and reporting information as required by this article.
In
(f) The data collected as a result of the reporting requirements of this article shall not
constitute prima facie evidence of racial profiling.
(g) On a finding by the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and
Education that the chief administrator of a law enforcement agency intentionally failed to submit
a report required under Subsection (b), the commission shall begin disciplinary procedures
against the chief administrator.
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Amended by:
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R. S., Ch. 1172 Sec. 27, eff September 1, 2009.
Art. 2.135. PARTIAL EXEMPTION FOR AGENCIES USING VIDEO AND AUDIO
EQUIPMENT.
(a) A peace officer is exempt from the reporting requirement under Article 2.133 and
the chief administrator of a law enforcement agency, regardless of whether the administrator is
elected, employed, or appointed, is exempt from the compilation, analysis, and reporting
requirements under Article 2.134 if:
(1) during the calendar year preceding the date that a report under Article 2.134
is required to be submitted:
(A) each law enforcement motor vehicle regularly used by an officer
employed by the agency to make motor vehicle stops is equipped with video camera and
transmitter - activated equipment and each law enforcement motorcycle regularly used to make
motor vehicle stops is equipped with transmitter - activated equipment; and
(B) each motor vehicle stop made by an officer employed by the agency
that is capable of being recorded by video and audio or audio equipment, as appropriate, is
recorded by using the equipment; or
(2) the governing body of the county or municipality served by the law
enforcement agency, in conjunction with the law enforcement agency, certifies to the
Department of Public Safety, not later than the date specified by rule by the department, that the
law enforcement agency needs funds or video and audio equipment for the purpose of installing
video and audio equipment as described by Subsection (a)(1)(A) and the agency does not receive
from the state funds or video and audio equipment sufficient, as determined by the department,
for the agency to accomplish that purpose.
(b) Except as otherwise provided by this subsection, a law enforcement agency that is
exempt from the requirements under Article 2.134 shall retain the video and audio or audio
documentation of each motor vehicle stop for at least 90 days after the date of the stop. If a
complaint is filed with the law enforcement agency alleging that a peace officer employed by the
19
agency has engaged in racial profiling with respect to a motor vehicle stop, the agency shall
retain the video and audio or audio record of the stop until final disposition of the complaint.
(c) This article does not affect the collection or reporting requirements under Article
2.132.
(d) In this article, "motor vehicle stop" has the meaning assigned by Article 2.132(a).
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Amended by:
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R. S., Ch. 1172 Sec. 28, eff September 1, 2009.
Art. 2.136. LIABILITY.
A peace officer is not liable for damages arising from an act relating to the collection or
reporting of information as required by Article 2.133 or under a policy adopted under Article
2.132.
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Art. 2.137. PROVISION OF FUNDING OR EQUIPMENT.
(a) The Department of Public Safety shall adopt rules for providing funds or video and
audio equipment to law enforcement agencies for the purpose of installing video and audio
equipment as described by Article 2.135(a)(1)(A), including specifying criteria to prioritize
funding or equipment provided to law enforcement agencies. The criteria may include
consideration of tax effort, financial hardship, available revenue, and budget surpluses. The
criteria must give priority to:
(1) law enforcement agencies that employ peace officers whose primary duty is traffic
enforcement;
(2) smaller jurisdictions; and
(3) municipal and county law enforcement agencies.
(b) The Department of Public Safety shall collaborate with an institution of higher
education to identify law enforcement agencies that need funds or video and audio equipment for
the purpose of installing video and audio equipment as described by Article 2.135(a)(1)(A). The
collaboration may include the use of a survey to assist in developing criteria to prioritize funding
or equipment provided to law enforcement agencies.
(c) To receive funds or video and audio equipment from the state for the purpose of
installing video and audio equipment as described by Article 2.135(a)(1)(A), the governing body
of a county or municipality, in conjunction with the law enforcement agency serving the county
20
or municipality, shall certify to the Department of Public Safety that the law enforcement agency
needs funds or video and audio equipment for that purpose.
(d) On receipt of funds or video and audio equipment from the state for the purpose of
installing video and audio equipment as described by Article 2.135(a)(1)(A), the governing body
of a county or municipality, in conjunction with the law enforcement agency serving the county
or municipality, shall certify to the Department of Public Safety that the law enforcement agency
has installed video and audio equipment as described by Article 2.135(a)(1)(A) and is using the
equipment as required by Article 2.135(a)(1).
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Art. 2.138. RULES.
The Department of Public Safety may adopt rules to implement Articles 2.131- 2.137.
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Art. 2.1385. CIVIL PENALTY.
(a) If the chief administrator of a local law enforcement agency intentionally fails to
submit the incident -based data as required by Article 2.134, the agency is liable to the state for a
civil penalty in the amount of $1,000 for each violation. The attorney general may sue to collect
a civil penalty under this subsection.
(b) From money appropriated to the agency for the administration of the agency, the
executive director of a state law enforcement agency that intentionally fails to submit the
incident -based data as required by Article 2.134 shall remit to the comptroller the amount of
$1,000 for each violation.
(c) Money collected under this article shall be deposited in the state treasury to the
credit of the general revenue fund.
Added by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R. S., Ch. 1172 Sec. 29, eff. September 1, 2009.
21
TCLEOSE RULES
Sec. 1701.253. SCHOOL CURRICULUM.
(a) The commission shall establish minimum curriculum requirements for preparatory
and advanced courses and programs for schools subject to approval under Section
1701.251(c)(1).
(b) In establishing requirements under this section, the commission shall require
courses and programs to provide training in:
(1) the investigation and documentation of cases that involve:
(A) child abuse or neglect;
(B) family violence; and
(C) sexual assault;
(2) issues concerning sex offender characteristics; and
(3) crime victims' rights under Chapter 56, Code of Criminal Procedure, and
Chapter 57, Family Code, and the duty of law enforcement agencies to ensure that a victim is
afforded those rights.
(c) As part of the minimum curriculum requirements, the commission shall establish a
statewide comprehensive education and training program on civil rights, racial sensitivity, and
cultural diversity for persons licensed under this chapter.
(d) Training in documentation of cases required by Subsection (b) shall include
instruction in:
(1) making a written account of the extent of injuries sustained by the victim of
an alleged offense;
(2) recording by photograph or videotape the area in which an alleged offense
occurred and the victim's injuries; and
(3) recognizing and recording a victim's statement that may be admissible as
evidence in a proceeding concerning the matter about which the statement was made.
(e) As part of the minimum curriculum requirements relating to the vehicle and traffic
laws of this state, the commission shall require an education and training program on laws
relating to the operation of motorcycles and to the wearing of protective headgear by motorcycle
operators and passengers. In addition, the commission shall require education and training on
motorcycle operator profiling awareness and sensitivity training.
(f) Training for officers and recruits in investigation of cases required by Subsection
(b)(1)(B) shall include instruction in preventing dual arrest whenever possible and conducting a
thorough investigation to determine which person is the predominant aggressor when allegations
22
of family violence from two or more opposing persons are received arising from the same
incident.
(g) As part of the minimum curriculum requirements, the commission shall establish a
statewide comprehensive education and training program on asset forfeiture under Chapter 59,
Code of Criminal Procedure, for officers licensed under this chapter. An officer shall complete a
program established under this subsection not later than the second anniversary of the date the
officer is licensed under this chapter or the date the officer applies for an intermediate
proficiency certificate, whichever date is earlier.
(h) As part of the minimum curriculum requirements, the commission shall establish a
statewide comprehensive education and training program on racial profiling for officers licensed
under this chapter. An officer shall complete a program established under this subsection not
later than the second anniversary of the date the officer is licensed under this chapter or the date
the officer applies for an intermediate proficiency certificate, whichever date is earlier.
(i) As part of the minimum curriculum requirements, the commission shall establish a
statewide comprehensive education and training program on identity theft under Section 32.5 1,
Penal Code, for officers licensed under this chapter. An officer shall complete a program
established under this subsection not later than the second anniversary of the date the officer is
licensed under this chapter or the date the officer applies for an intermediate proficiency
certificate, whichever date is earlier.
0) As part of the minimum curriculum requirements, the commission shall require an
officer to complete a statewide education and training program on de- escalation and crisis
intervention techniques to facilitate interaction with persons with mental impairments. An
officer shall complete the program not later than the second anniversary of the date the officer is
licensed under this chapter or the date the officer applies for an intermediate proficiency
certificate, whichever date is earlier. An officer may not satisfy the requirements of this section
or Section 1701.402(g) by taking an online course on de- escalation and crisis intervention
techniques to facilitate interaction with persons with mental impairments.
(k) As part of the minimum curriculum requirements, the commission shall establish a
statewide comprehensive education and training program for officers licensed under this chapter
that covers the laws of this state and of the United States pertaining to peace officers.
Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 388, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1999. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch.
657, Sec. 4, eff Sept. 1, 2001; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 897, Sec. 1, eff Sept. 1, 2001; Acts
2001, 77th Leg., ch. 929, Sec. 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 4, eff.
Sept. 1, 2001; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1034, Sec. 14, eff Sept. 1, 2001; Acts 2003, 78th Leg.,
ch. 1276, Sec. 14.007, eff Sept. 1, 2003; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1326, Sec. 8, eff Sept. 1,
2003.
23
Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 393 Sec. 3, eff. September 1, 2005.
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R. S., Ch. 1172 Sec. 12, eff. September 1, 2009.
Sec. 1701.402. PROFICIENCY CERTIFICATES.
(a) The commission shall issue certificates that recognize proficiency based on law
enforcement training, education, and experience. For this purpose the commission shall use the
employment records of the employing agency.
(b) As a requirement for a basic proficiency certificate, the commission shall require
completion of local courses or programs of instruction on federal and state statutes that relate to
employment issues affecting peace officers and county jailers, including:
(1) civil service;
(2) compensation, including overtime compensation, and vacation time;
(3) personnel files and other employee records;
(4) management - employee relations in law enforcement organizations;
(5) work - related injuries;
(6) complaints and investigations of employee misconduct; and
(7) disciplinary actions and the appeal of disciplinary actions.
(c) An employing agency is responsible for providing the training required by this
section.
(d) As a requirement for an intermediate proficiency certificate, an officer must
complete an education and training program on asset forfeiture established by the commission
under Section 1701.253(g).
(e) As a requirement for an intermediate proficiency certificate, an officer must
complete an education and training program on racial profiling established by the commission
under Section 1701.253(h).
(f) As a requirement for an intermediate proficiency certificate, an officer must
complete an education and training program on identity theft established by the commission
under Section 1701.253(i).
(g) As a requirement for an intermediate proficiency certificate or an advanced
proficiency certificate, an officer must complete the education and training program described by
Section 1701.253 regarding de- escalation and crisis intervention techniques to facilitate
interaction with persons with mental impairments.
Text of subsection as added by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1002 Sec. 6
24
(h) As a requirement for an intermediate or advanced proficiency certificate issued by
the commission on or after January 1, 2011, an officer must complete the basic education and
training program on the trafficking of persons described by Section 1701.258(a).
Text of subsection as added by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R. S., Ch. 1172 Sec. 17
(h) As a requirement for an intermediate proficiency certificate, an officer must
complete an education and training program on investigative topics established by the
commission under Section 1701.253(b).
(i) As a requirement for an intermediate proficiency certificate, an officer must
complete an education and training program on civil rights, racial sensitivity, and cultural
diversity established by the commission under Section 1701.253(c).
Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 388, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1999. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch.
929, Sec. 6, eff. Sept. 1, 2001; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001; Acts
2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1276, Sec. 14.008, eff. Sept. 1, 2003; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1326, Sec.
9, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.
Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 393 Sec. 4, eff. September 1, 2005.
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R. S., Ch. 1002 Sec. 6, eff. September 1, 2009.
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R. S., Ch. 1172 Sec. 17, eff. September 1, 2009.
25
Appendix B
Racial Profiling Laws and Corresponding
General Orders and Standard Operating
Procedures
Texas CCP Article
SDPS General Order or Patrol SOP
2.132(b)1
GO 603.41
2.132(b)2
Police SOP 121.00 - 121.03 (c)
2.132(b)3
Police SOP 121.07
2.132(b)4
Police SOP 121.04 (b), 121.06 A -B)
2.132(b)5
Police SOP 121.05
2.132(b)6
Police SOP 121.08
2.132(b)7
Police SOP 121.08
26