Attorney Gilberto Hinojosa, representing ex-San Benito police officer Candido Ortiz, is seen (above) arguing his case during a Civil Service Commission hearing on Monday in an attempt to reinstate Ortiz, who is also seen being sworn in. Operations Chief Martin Morales and Alan Ozuna, attorney representing the city, are pictured giving testimony. (Staff photos by Heather Cathleen Cox)
By HEATHER CATHLEEN COX
Staff Writer
reporter@sbnewspaper.com
“We’re going to appeal at district court,” said attorney Gilberto Hinojosa on Monday evening, after the San Benito Civil Service Commission unanimously voted to uphold San Benito Police Department Operations Chief Martin Morales’ decision to indefinitely suspend Hinojosa’s client, Candido Ortiz.
The decision came Monday during a Civil Service Commission hearing in which Ortiz, a veteran police officer prior to his indefinite suspension from the SBPD, was fighting to get his job back. Morales suspended Ortiz in June following an incident in which Ortiz was arrested for allegedly pulling a gun on deputies from the Cameron County Sheriff’s Department.
On June 11, Deputies Ricardo Alvarado and Darlene Palacios responded to Ortiz’s residence after receiving a call from his 13-year-old son regarding a physical altercation of domestic violence allegedly transpiring between the reporting party’s father and 29-year-old son.
Ortiz and his eldest son were reportedly drinking alcohol, with Ortiz admittedly drinking from 7-11 p.m. The altercation allegedly began when the 29-year-old tried to intervene in a verbal dispute between Ortiz and his wife. The physical altercation included Ortiz allegedly punching his son and holding him in a headlock, according to police reports.
Ortiz was reportedly asleep inside his bedroom when deputies arrived and noticed a hole in the wall, allegedly where Ortiz drove his fist though, and upturned furniture. A deputy attempted to make contact with Ortiz, who was inside of his bedroom reportedly asleep. The bedroom door was barricaded with a piece of furniture, which according to Ortiz’s testimony was placed there in an attempt to prevent his eldest from entering the room.
According to sworn testimony from Alvarado, he knocked twice on the bedroom door and announced his presence to Ortiz.
According to his protocol, the deputy needed to make contact with Alvarado, so he pushed his way into the door, part way, enough to etch his head and shoulders into the room here he alleges that he saw Ortiz in bed, pointing his police issued weapon at the deputy.
At the time of this incident, Alvarado was new to the sheriff’s department, specifically two months, while Ortiz was a veteran police officer of over 16 years with the SBPD. Hinojosa argued this case.
However, Palacios, a field training officer, was in charge of overseeing the deputy’s actions at the time of the aforementioned incident and reports that the deputy handled himself in a proper fashion.
Chief Morales said, “This behavior is very concerning. There is no need for an officer to make contact with their (department-issued) weapon, while in bed, after they have consumed alcohol and were involved in a physical altercation.”
Additionally, attention was called to reports that Ortiz did not wish to surrender himself to the deputies’ authority and instead was taken into custody by San Benito police, despite his private residence is located in the jurisdiction of the county.
SBPD Assistant Operations Michael Galvan said, “Ortiz was uncooperative…he did not want to be transported by deputies.”
Among the reasons listed by the chief for ultimately deciding to indefinitely suspend Ortiz include: First degree felony charges of aggravated assault on a police officer, family violence, having a protective order issued against him, attracting negative public and media attention to the department, conduct unbecoming to a police officer.
Morales said this type of incident, even despite Ortiz’s clean record coming into this circumstance, was a “one strike and you’re out” kind of offense. Morales also pointed out that an officer of 16 years should “know better.”
Ortiz maintained throughout the hearing that he did not pull his weapon on the deputy, and his attorney made the argument that Deputy Alvarado and Ortiz are the only two who actually know what happened that night. Hinojosa asked the commission, “Are you going to take a two-month deputy’s word over a veteran officer who has pulled a baby from a burning building?” The latter, he was referencing the fact that Ortiz has saved lives of colleagues and civilians throughout his career as an officer.
Ultimately, after listening to testimony and deliberating for over 10 hours, the commission reached a decision to deny Ortiz’s request for reinstatement as a SWAT officer with the SBPD. Hinojosa said, “Obviously, the commission had a specific bias beforehand. It was obvious by the questions they asked my client.” Hinojosa said his client’s next course of action is to “appeal this before the district court.”
Read this story in the Dec. 5 edition of the San Benito News, or subscribe to our E-Edition by clicking here.
4 comments
Skip to comment form
David must live with Ortiz and has first hand knowledge of what happened.
David must live with Ortiz.
ORTIZ IS ALSO A COMBAT VETERAN AND HAS SERVED OUR COUNTRY AND I HAVE KNOWN HIM TO BE A STRAIGHT SHOOTER SOMEONE WHO YOU WANT PROTECTING YOU
Why in the world would the Deputy lie about Ortiz pulling the gun? It seems obvious that Ortiz is a danger to the community and should not be reinstated.