Oddi-Smith    1-9S    Crt – CJ Shepard
(Judge Reuben B. Hill, Marion Superior Court reversed.  Suppression of evidence vacated.  Case remanded for consideration on the merits.)  

The consolidation of the Indianapolis Police Department (IPD) and the Marion County Sheriff’s Department (MCSD) into the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department (IMPD) did not create a need to re-swear the officers.  Their previous sworn status carried forward to the newly created entity. 

FACTS:
Under Unigov the City-County Council of Indianapolis passed an ordinance consolidating IPD and the MCSD into the IMPD.  IMPD officially assumed law enforcement service in Marion County on January 1, 2007.  On that date, all IPD and MCSD officers automatically became officers of the IMPD.  The next day there was a voluntary swearing-in ceremony that most officers did not attend. 
On January 15, 2007 the defendant was involved in a three car accident.  Officer Bueckers conducted an operating while intoxicated investigation and arrested her.  Officer Bueckers was sworn in as an IPD officer in August of 2001, but had not been re-sworn as an IMPD officer at the time of the arrest.  Oddi-Smith was then formally charged with operating while intoxicated.  The defense filed and won a motion to suppress asserting the officer lacked authority to perform the arrest because he was not re-sworn after the consolidation, and the court dismissed the case.     

DISCUSSION:
Indiana law requires law enforcement officers to take an oath before beginning official duties.  IC 5-4-1-1(a).
Consolidation Statute
IC 36-3-1-5.1(e)(2) requires only that the consolidating ordinance specify which officers of the city police department and which of the county sheriff’s department shall be officers of the consolidated law enforcement department.  The statute does not impose additional requirements like passing a new exam, or re-swearing in.  Rather, it provides for an automatic transition into active duty.  Further, under subsection (e)(4-5) the officers retain accrued pension benefits and service credits.  The statute may permit the city-county council to impose additional requirements on the officers upon consolidation (like re-training, re-testing and re-swearing), but it doesn’t mandate additional requirements. 
General Ordinance No. 110
Under the ordinance the old departments ceased to exist after December 31, 2006, and “IMPD became the legal successor in interest.”  All members of the former departments “automatically became members of IMPD.”  “It specifically granted each IMPD officer general police power and power to arrest, making no mention of a re-swearing requirement.”   It set forth recruitment, training, and examination requirements for members joining the IMPD, but excepted out those officers who became IMPD members automatically through the consolidation.  An officer’s length of service was retained in the consolidation, along with all pension benefits.  Northing in the ordinance required re-swearing for officers transitioning from IPD and MCSD into the IMPD. 

The IMPD internal directive, General Order 1.1.1 does not require a second oath for the transitioned officers either, as it is aimed at personnel new to law enforcement.  “All persons employed by the IMPD as a merit or reserve police officer, prior to assuming sworn status, must meet with the chief of Police or Sheriff to receive the oath of office for this department.” 

“There might well be other grounds on which the arrest of Oddi-Smith was valid, like the ‘de facto officer’ doctrine.”  “We think it sufficient grounds to say that the arresting officer was recruited, trained, and sworn as an IPD officer and that he took all that with him to the IMPD.