![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/GVWire-Ad-Get-our-mobile-app-1280x90-1-1.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n\u201cFresno instead decided that it wasn\u2019t going to produce records, or if it did, it produced heavily redacted records. And so that was the crux of the challenge,\u201d Salceda said. \u201cWe really hope that the city ends up complying with the responsibilities it has had since we first submitted this records request that entitle us to the records we\u2019ve been seeking.\u201d<\/p>\n
Fresno City Council President Nelson Esparza is still evaluating what to do.<\/p>\n
\u201cI remain undecided on this particular issue. This is a pretty technical issue, and I\u2019ll be leaning a lot on our internal experts as I navigate toward a final decision,\u201d Esparza said.<\/p>\n
ACLU\u2019s Request<\/p>\n
ACLU attorneys requested the following records in its PRA:<\/p>\n
(1) any completed use of force forms or use of force reports concerning use of a police canine;
\n(2) use of force reports documenting police canine bites and\/or injuries;
\n(3) records, including reports, concerning accidental police canine bites and\/or injuries; and
\n(4) all records relating to the report and investigation.<\/p>\n
After weeks of letters back and forth between attorneys, the ACLU filed a lawsuit in 2024.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe ACLU requested these records due to growing community concerns about Fresno\u2019s egregious use of police canine force and its disproportionate use against communities of color,\u201d the ACLU said in its writ of mandate<\/a> filed April 22, 2024.<\/p>\n The ACLU said the records the city returned were heavily redacted, \u201cstripping them of their most relevant responsive content.\u201d<\/p>\n The city responded two months later with partial and redacted records. The city produced reports from 2019, 2020, and 2022, but not 2021, the ACLU said.<\/p>\n \u201cRather than illuminating the circumstances surrounding Fresno\u2019s use of police canines, these redacted reports provide little but a series of empty gray boxes,\u201d the ACLU said in its writ. The city told the ACLU other information was withheld, citing exemptions to the PRA such as attorney-client privilege, the constitutional right to privacy, and investigative records.<\/p>\n ACLU Used Data for Report<\/p>\n \u201cFresno instead decided that they weren\u2019t going to produce records, or if they did, they produced heavily redacted records. And so that was the crux of the challenge.\u201d \u2014 Angelica Salceda, ACLU<\/p>\n The ACLU used its findings to release a report in 2024<\/a>, \u201cWeaponizing Dogs: The Brutal and Outdated Practice of Police Attack Dogs.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhen it comes to the use of canines, they can result in pretty gnarly injuries. We wanted to understand how various departments use K-9s, when they decide to deploy them, and what types of calls they are used for,\u201d Salceda said.<\/p>\n The report called the use of police dogs \u201coutdated and dangerous.\u201d<\/p>\n From the data Fresno provided, the police department does not have policies that limit K-9 use to instances where a threat of serious injury exists, for crowd control, or for violent crimes.<\/p>\n The civil rights group also supported 2023 legislation limiting the use of police K-9s. At the time, then-Fresno Police Chief Paco Balderrama criticized the bill, AB 742,<\/a> by Assemblymember Corey Jackson, D-Moreno Valley. The bill died in the Assembly\u2019s inactive file in 2024.<\/p>\n Judges Favor ACLU Over City<\/p>\n W. Kent Hamlin, a retired Fresno County Superior Court judge hearing the case, ruled in the ACLU\u2019s favor<\/a> May 19, 2025.<\/p>\n The parties argued over the definition of \u201cgreat bodily injury\u201d and \u201cserious bodily injury\u201d and whether those would be exempt under state law. Hamlin sided with the ACLU. The city could only redact personal identifying information for a victim or officer. He also awarded $1,413 in court costs to the ACLU.<\/p>\n An award for attorney fees is still being argued in court.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Angelica-Salceda-with-ACLU-Headshot-150x150.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n