Agencies | Online Services | Policies
Blue Bar
Header
graphic
Header
Header
About Pop Up FAQ's Commission Members Commission Meeting Minutes Links Contact Us Home
Mission Statement Goals Objectives Objectives History graphic

12-9-108 Failure to Meet Qualifications -
Effect - Exemptions
(As Amendeed - Act 44, 1989)

  1. Actions taken by law enforcement officers who do not meet all of the standards and qualifications set forth in this subchapter or made by the Arkansas Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Training shall not be held invalid merely because of the failure to meet the standards and qualifications.

    1. Nothing in this subchapter or any requirements made by the Commission shall prevent any action by a private citizen that is now authorized by law.

    2. Nor shall any provision of this subchapter affect the deputizing of a private citizen by a law enforcement officer in a time of a disaster or emergency.

    3. Nothing in this subchapter or any other law shall prohibit inspectors and code enforcement officers of cities and towns from issuing citations for the violation of municipal codes, ordinances, or regulations that they are charged by their city or town with the duty of enforcing.

      1. Cities of the first and second class and incorporated towns are authorized to employ persons who do not meet certification requirements prescribed by the Arkansas Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Training to issue citations for parking violations occurring within the corporate limits of the city or town.

      2. Persons employed under this subdivision shall not carry firearms nor take any other official law enforcing action except that enumerated in subdivision (b) (4) (a) of this section.

HISTORY Acts 1975, No. 452, 10; A.S.A. 1947, 19-4912, 19-4913, 1983, No. 763, 1; 1985, No. 580, 1,2; 42-1009.

CASE NOTES

FAILURE TO BE CERTIFIED

Chief of police who was not certified during part of tenure could not validly act as law enforcement officer during that period; however, where he was validly employed by the city, his salary was reasonable, and he acted in good faith, the city was not entitled to a refund of the compensation paid him during the period of noncertification. Allen v. Titsworth, 279 Ark. 138, 649 S.W.2d 185 (1983).

Cited: Smith v. State, 278 Ark. 462, 648 S.W.2d 792 (1983).


graphic
graphic
OLES
ALETA
graphic

About Us | FAQ's | Commission Members | Commission Meeting Minutes
Links | Contact Us | OLES | ALETA | Site Map | Home