Nebraska Supreme Court Upholds Deputy's Firing Over 2 Unserved Warrants

Q: If a jury finds an officer not guilty, why can they still be fired for the same action?

Yes. A criminal acquittal does not stop a police department from firing an officer over the same conduct, because the two processes ask different questions and use different standards. A jury’s “not guilty” verdict means prosecutors did not prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. It does not mean the officer did nothing wrong. An employer, including a sheriff’s office, can still decide that the conduct violated department rules, job duties, or professional standards under a lower standard such as substantial evidence or a preponderance of the evidence. That is what happened in the Nebraska case involving Lancaster County deputy sheriff sergeant Ryan Schmuecker. Although a jury acquitted him on a criminal neglect charge, the Nebraska Supreme Court still upheld his firing. The court said there was sufficient evidence that he knowingly failed to serve valid warrants and violated both Nebraska law and sheriff’s office procedures. His own statements — that he would not “mess with” the warrants because he did not want to “waste [his] time” — supported that finding. Employment discipline is also about fitness for duty and public trust, not just criminal liability. Law enforcement agencies can remove officers who fail to follow mandatory duties, even if the conduct is not proven criminally. Courts generally allow that so long as the department follows fair procedures, conducts its own investigation, and has evidence supporting the decision.

2 articles · Updated · Bloomberg Law · Jun 23

Nebraska's highest court affirmed the firing of a Lancaster County deputy sheriff sergeant who failed to arrest two people with outstanding warrants for unpaid fines.
Court records showed he told the individuals he would not “mess with” the warrants because he did not want to “waste [his] time,” conduct the court said supported the termination.
The ruling backed the merit commission's finding that the deputy violated both his statutory duty and the sheriff's office standard operating procedures.
The decision leaves intact the county's disciplinary action and reinforces that deputies must execute valid warrants even in low-level fine cases.