Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart
No. CIV.17-01011 WJ/GBW
BRANDON ELLIS, JEREMY ARTIS and VASSHAWN ROBINSON, Plaintiffs,
Vs.
HOBBS POLICE DEPARTMENT, SERGEANT JASON HERRERA, LIEUTENANT CHAD
WRIGHT, LIEUTENANT SHANE BLEVINS, OFFICER JEREMY KIRK, OFFICER
MATTHEW BURLESON, OFFICER JIMMY GRIMES, CHIEF OF POLICE CHRISTOPHER
MCCALL and CITY MANAGER J.J. MURPHY.

CONTENTS

I.
II.
III.
IV.

V.

Introduction………………………………………………………………….…….1
Scope of this Report…………………………………………………………….…2
Qualifications and Professional Background………………………….…..…….3
Discussion and Opinions………………………………………………....……….3
Background…………………………………………………………………..........3
Plaintiff Brandon Ellis……………………………………………………………4
Plaintiff Vasshawn Robinson…………………………………………………….10
Plaintiff Jeremy Artis…………………………………………………………….11
Hobbs Police Department Patrol Operations…………………………………...15
Hobbs Police Department Administration……………………………………...20
Policies…………………………………………………………………………….22
Training…………………………………………………………………………...22
Supervision………………………………………………………………………..22
Discipline………………………………………………………………………….23
Conclusions……………………………………………………………………….24

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 1

 Introduction
I submitted an Initial Expert Report in this case on July 31, 2019.
In my Initial Report I reported the manner in which I was retained as an Expert Witness.
Since that report, I have invoiced Plaintiff’s attorneys $8800.00 for 46 hours for my
professional services, research and analysis of documents associated with this case and the
preparation of this report and $34.85 for incidental printing costs.

I.

Scope of this Report

My Expert Report(s) will provide my opinions which will be based on the complaint, relevant
court documents, transcripts of depositions and discovery materials given to me by Plaintiffs’
Attorneys.
I have now reviewed the following documents:
Complaint: Ellis, et. al. v. Hobbs NM Police Department and Defendants
LCCA Dispatch – CAD Call Logs by Officer, 5-1-2015 to 5-31-2015
Hobbs Police Department CAD Call Logs by officer 7-26-2016 to 1-26-2017
Jody Johnson v. city of Hobbs, Stipulated Agreement
Jody Johnson v. City of Hobbs, Supplement to Stipulated Agreement
Deposition of JJ Murphy
Deposition of Shane Blevins
Declaration of William S. Cooper
Deposition of Joseph Cotton
Deposition of Jason Herrera
Deposition of Christopher McCall
Deposition of Vasshawn Andre Robinson
Depositions of Brandon Ellis
Deposition of Jeremy Artis
Deposition of Eric Berdoza
Deposition of Jenna Ford
Deposition of Ahmaad White
Deposition of Clipper Miller
New Mexico Whistleblower Protection Act
CAD Report Pedestrian Stops May 2015 to April 2016
CAD Report Pedestrian Stops, 2016-2018
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO COMPEL

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 2

 As I pointed out in my Initial Expert Report, my opinions are based on my professional and
personal experiences and my expert knowledge and understanding of standard police practices.
I approach each expert engagement embracing logic and common sense in evaluating police
practices and performance in comparison with other similarly situated police organizations. I
conduct analysis of those police practices with a guiding set of principles that are critically
important to the effective administration of the modern police agency. Policy must be relevant
and contemporary in comparison to similarly situated police agencies. Training must reflect
critical policy changes and test officer knowledge. Contemporary topics and legal updates,
common to comparably sized departments should be a part of in-service and roll call training.
Supervisors must have active and engaged employee management and held responsible for
documenting a set of key performance indicators for each and every subordinate. The
department must audit key management performance indicators for civil and criminal
vulnerabilities.
There must be a Discipline system that includes a table of penalties that is fairly and impartially
administered and an Early Intervention System that monitors employees’ behavior and
performance in a manner that identifies personal problems, under-performance and
unconstitutional behavior at its earliest detection and steps taken to reverse the pattern. The
outcomes of management and administration are made public in a way that increases
accountability and community trust.
My evaluations are based on standard industry practices. It’s what we would expect
from the typical department of similar size and makeup. I will note industry best
practices when I observe them.
III.

Qualifications and Professional Background

My qualifications and Professional Background were listed in my Initial Expert Report and my
full resume was attached.

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 3

 IV.

DISCUSSION AND OPINIONS
Background

1. Approximately twenty years ago, the City of Hobbs and its police department were
involved in a civil rights suit based on the allegedly discriminatory actions of HPD. See
Johnson, et al. v. Hobbs City of, et al., No. 6:99‐cv‐0348 MV/DJS. The allegations
involved events which occurred between April 1996 and November 1999. See id. (doc.
59). The class of plaintiffs was comprised of all African‐American citizens residing in
Hobbs, New Mexico between March 29, 1999 and June 10, 2001. See id. (doc. 123). On
June 21, 2001, the parties reached a Stipulated Agreement Resolving All Class and
Individual Claims for Injunctive Relief. Id. (doc. 123) (hereinafter “Stipulated
Agreement”). The Stipulated Agreement mandated certain actions on the part of HPD to
remedy and prevent racial discrimination in policing. The Court retained jurisdiction for
several years in order to ensure compliance1. The Stipulated Agreement ended on
February 23, 2007.2
2. On June 22, 2001, the parties to the Stipulated Agreement entered into a Supplement to
Stipulated Agreement, No. CIV 99-00348 MVIDJS-ACE. The term of the Stipulated
Agreement was extended to December 21, 2006 when it would sunset provided that it was
not extended by the new monitor, the undersigned, who replaced the original monitor,
Clarence Chapman.3
3. The Hobbs Police Department satisfied all of the requirements of the Stipulated
Agreement and its Supplement within the dates outlined in the Agreement. The
department also became accredited by CALEA, the Commission on Accreditation for
Law Enforcement Agencies. Accreditation by CALEA is the gold standard in policing
certifying that the agency is practicing industry “best practices.” The last year that the
Hobbs Police Department was accredited by CALEA was 2006.
4. Defendant Christopher McCall, Defendant Shane Blevins, Brian Dunlap, Charles
Cunningham and Clipper Miller, all of whom are connected in a variety of ways in the
present case, were all on the police department during the Stipulated Agreement and the
underlying case, Jody Johnson v. City of Hobbs No. CIV 99-00348 MV/DJS-ACE. In
reading materials connected to the present case, I recognized these names from my
previous monitoring engagement.

Plaintiff Brandon Ellis
5. Plaintiff Brandon Ellis joined the Hobbs Police Department in August, 2012. While
viewed as being reserved and somewhat reluctant to speak to the public during citizen
1

Dismissal with Prejudice, noting that the term of Stipulated Agreement had expired. Is. (doc. 278)
[Doc 143] Order Granting in Part & Denying in Part Motion to Compel, 07-26-19
3
Supplement to Stipulated Agreement No. CIV-9900348 MV/DJS-ACE
2

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 4

 contacts, Officer Ellis received positive reviews during the successful completion of
Phase I of the Field Training Program. FTO Smith indicated that Ellis had been very
vigilant during vehicle and personal searches, and was actively involved in locating a
significant amount of black tar heroin, methamphetamines, and cocaine that was in the
possession of suspects whom he engaged during investigations on the street. Smith
indicated further that Ellis had a good working knowledge on how to log drugs into
evidence, conducted good traffic stops and possessed “decent” officer safety skills.4
6. In Phase 2 of the Field Training Program, FTO Rojas indicated that Ellis needed to
improve his “command presence,” and with the approval of then Lt. Charles
Cunningham, recommended that he repeat the Officer Survival training within this phase
of the program. Ellis agreed with this recommendation and successfully completed Phase
2 after repeating the Officer Survival training5.
7. During Phase 3 of the Field Training Program, FTO Rojas’ review indicated that Ellis
displayed eagerness to learn his newly chosen law enforcement profession, and that his
uniform and equipment were maintained in a manner that reflected a professional image.
Further, Rojas said that Ellis had made drastic progress in learning the geographical areas
of the city. Ellis was able to get to most addresses without referring to his map, and did
so in a timely manner. Ellis’ report writing was also rated as “above average.”
Additionally, Ellis completed several information and criminal courses with little or no
assistance. Several of the pre-release test questions were discussed with Ellis, and he was
made aware that they would be on the test at the end of Phase 3. It was deemed at this
juncture, that Ellis’ command presence had improved and that it was less of an issue in
terms of his development as a patrol officer.6
8. Officer Ellis passed the officer proficiency test on April 4, 2013, with a score of 78. He
completed his probationary period with the Hobbs Police Department on June 23, 2013,
after which he began working as a patrol officer
9. On August 9, 2013, Officer Ellis received his first Annual Performance Evaluation
covering the period August 1, 2012 through June 16, 2013. This evaluation was by his
immediate supervisor, Sgt. Danny Garrett, and signed by Sgt. Garrett’s successor, Sgt.
Moyers. One section of the evaluation reads that Officer Ellis is quiet and exhibits a
positive attitude when engaged with the public and his co-workers, but tends to get “lost
in the crowd” when input on a given situation is requested of him. It further reads that
Ellis needs to improve on his “command presence” during calls that require enforcement
action. Officer Ellis does listen and comprehends well, but needs to improve his
communication skills. In terms of his overall performance, the report reads, “Officer Ellis
needs to focus on his command presence and be assertive when making decisions when
enforcement actions are required. Officer Ellis has a good personality and is easy to get
4

Ellis 11-5-18 P. 183
Ellis 11-5-18 PP. 186-187
6
Ellis 11-5-18 PP. 187-190
5

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 5

 along with, but has missed opportunities due to hesitation when action is needed. Officer
Ellis does conduct traffic stops and contacts when on patrol. Officer Ellis, however, does
have opportunities to change the way he carries himself while dealing with conflict. I
have discussed this issue with him and feel he understands what he is required to do in
order to remedy the issue. This type of change will only be fixed with exposure to
difficult situations. I feel Officer Ellis is capable of meeting---and will exceed the
challenges ahead.”7
10. Officer Ellis worked under the direct supervision of Sgt. Jason Herrera from mid-August,
2013 through August 1, 2014, and during a second evaluation period between August 1,
2015 and August 1, 2016. Ellis was placed on a Performance Improvement Program
(PIP) during his first annual evaluation under Sgt. Herrera. The PIP resulted from two
on-duty automobile accidents involving Ellis, even though the accidents had occurred in
the previous year. The PIP also included report writing, which was never addressed by
Sgt. Herrera prior to the PIP being presented to Ellis. Being put on the PIP disturbed Ellis
in that he believed it led to other HPD officers who were similarly situated being
disciplined8.
11. The adverse experiences with Sgt. Herrera started when Officer Eric Berdoza used the Nword in the presence of other line officers and Sgt. Herrera during a debriefing led by Sgt.
Clipper Miller in the squad room in August, 2014. Ellis was upset because neither Herrera
nor Miller took any corrective action pursuant to Berdoza speaking the N-word. Ellis
believed that he was being singled out by Sgt. Herrera, e.g., being placed on the PIP, and
especially for the report writing issues. Sgt. Herrera admitted that other officers were
having difficulties with the new reporting system, yet Ellis was the only one placed on a
PIP.9
12. Ellis believes Sgt. Herrera, who would bring him into his office for questioning about his
performance statistics, primarily vehicle and pedestrian stops, was retaliating against him.
This started after Ellis’ internal and external attempts to formally complain about Berdoza
using the N-word in front of him and other officers.10
13. Other experiences included Sgt. Herrera calling over the police radio for Ellis to meet with
him on the street. This was a custom that squad officers understood to be a form of
discipline by the Sgt., with respect to an officer’s performance, and no other officers were
being called out by Sgt. Herrera in this manner. On another occasion, Sgt. Herrera named
Ellis a witness to an incident involving two other officers who were being investigated by
Internal Affairs. Officer Ellis was not a factual witness and had no knowledge of the matter
being investigated by IA.11

7

Ellis 11-5-18. PP. 196-202
Ellis 11-5-18 P. 6
9
Ellis 11-5-18 PP.11-14
10
Ellis 11-5-18 PP.44
11
Ellis 11-5-18 PP. 70-75
8

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 6

 14. Sgt. Herrera set a goal of 80 stops per month that Ellis had to meet in order to achieve a
satisfactory performance review. Failure to meet this goal would result in disciplinary
action, up to and including termination, as expressed by Sgt. Herrera in a meeting with Ellis
and other officers. Moreover, Sgt. Herrera directed Ellis to spend most of his time in the
southeast section of Hobbs, known as Patrol Area 3 in order to reach the goal of 80 or more
stops per month. Ellis found this to be objectionable in that Area 3 is where most of the
city’s African-Americans and Hispanics live. Ellis had witnessed other officers making
numerous stops in Area 3, many of which he believed to be unconstitutional. Without
probable cause, officers were making random stops of citizens, and in some cases,
searching vehicles without the consent of the operators. After Ellis’ attempts to report
these matters, which he believed to be more of an unauthorized quota system, to ranking
department and city officials, and other entities such as the local branch of the NAACP, the
retaliation against him intensified.12
15. On August 18, 2014, Officer Eric Berdoza made the statement, “We jailed a lot of niggas
today,” in the presence of Sgt. Clipper Miller, Sgt. Jason Herrera and other officers during a
debriefing in the squad room. Berdoza expressed that to Ellis in a negative tone about the
people who were arrested that day. Ellis was insulted by Berdoza’s use of that term, and
believed it to be wholly inappropriate, especially by a law enforcement officer in the
workplace. Ellis was upset and disappointed with Berdoza, but only shook his head
without saying anything to him. Berdoza knew that Ellis was disappointed in him and
asked, “Are you going to snitch?” At the time, Ellis told the shift commander, Lt. Charles
Cunningham, what had just happened in the squad room and mentioned who was present at
the time Berdoza made his comment. Ellis does not believe the incident was documented
by any of the police supervisors who were present.
16. Ellis remembered from his police academy training about racial issues and how his
instructors reminded the class that it was unacceptable to use any kind of racial slurs, and to
ensure that any such words be immediately removed from their vocabulary. The instructors
emphasized that using racial slurs or slang would end their police career. Hearing the Nword from Berdoza was insulting, hurtful and upsetting to Ellis, who was raised in the
African American tradition that absolutely forbade the use of that word. Ellis remembered
hearing Berdoza use that word previously in front of Sgt. Herrera and believed that he
would take direct action against Berdoza, or at least prohibit him from ever using it again.
Apparently, Sgt. Herrera took no corrective measures with Berdoza. Ellis told Sgt. Miller
after the first time he heard Berdoza use the N-word. All of this was ultimately reported to
Lt. Cunningham, who told Ellis it was completely unacceptable and would be taken care of.
Ellis did not want to file an official written complaint in either instance because he did not
want to face retaliation and risk losing his job.
17. After the Berdoza incident, Ellis believes he suffered retaliation by Sgt. Herrera, and maybe
Lt. Shane Blevins, due to the fact that prior to him mentioning this to Lt. Cunningham, he
had no problems with Herrera or Blevins. Afterward, however, Herrera would not listen to
him and soon placed him on the PIP as a disciplinary action that could lead to termination,
based on other officers who were terminated after being put on a PIP.13
12
13

Ellis 11-5-18 PP. 70-75, Complaint PP. 4-6
Ellis 11-5-18. PP. 219-232

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 7

 18. After the second PIP and receipt of his termination notice in 2015, Ellis called Joseph
Cotton, president of the local branch of the NAACP, to discuss the specific adverse
personnel actions taken against him. In a follow-up meeting, Ellis brought up other
concerns he had about what was happening at HPD regarding disparate treatment of
citizens in the African-American community, a quota system that disproportionately
targeted Black and Hispanic citizens, and unfair disciplinary action taken against minority
officers inside HPD. Joseph Cotton then meets with city officials to discuss the issues
raised by Officer Ellis and other matters related to enforcement actions in minority
communities. In attendance at this meeting were City Manager, J.J. Murphy and Chief of
Police, Christopher McCall. Subsequent to his meeting with Joseph Cotton, Ellis had a
conversation with Chief McCall, who assured Ellis that the concerns he raised with Cotton
would be addressed, and that he (McCall) would not tolerate racism of any kind by
members of HPD. McCall also discussed the problems Ellis was having with Sgt. Herrera
and that he would find another assignment for Ellis to remove him from Sgt. Herrera’s
supervision. A change in Ellis’ assignment did not occur, and it was during this period
when Ellis feels even greater pressure to perform and heightened retaliation by his
superiors.14
19. Cotton spoke with Chief McCall about the N-word being used by Officer Berdoza and was
not satisfied with McCall’s response. Cotton was “alarmed” that McCall tried to “justify”
Berdoza’s use of the word at any time, and especially in a meeting with other police
officers. In his meeting with Cotton, Ellis complained that he was offended and that
nothing was being done about this issue. 15
20. Cotton made clear to J.J. Murphy, Chief McCall and other city officials with whom he met
that racist language and the disproportionate contact with minority citizens by HPD officers
was totally unacceptable. Cotton told these city officials that Ellis, Vasshawn Robinson
and other officers complained to him about ongoing efforts by HPD supervisors to increase
the number of stops and arrests in the southeast section of Hobbs, Area 3. Cotton indicated
that this had been a problem since he became President of the Hobbs NAACP in 2008.
Cotton expressed concern that both Ellis and Robinson were being discriminated against,
citing disparities in the disciplinary system and that neither of these officers was willing to
be part of the “good old boys” network led by supervisors in the HPD chain of command. 16
21. Cotton told Murphy and McCall that Ellis and Robinson had a real fear of retaliation by
their supervisors, and both believed they would not be able to advance their careers at HPD.
The city officials in that meeting assured Cotton they would look into each of his
complaints and would hold accountable anyone who violated city policy and police
department rules and regulations.17
22. In follow-up discussions with Cotton, Ellis and Robinson expressed concerns that staff
inside HPD were aware they had been meeting with Cotton, and that things had gotten
progressively worse for them. They were given undesirable assignments, and Ellis
14

Ellis 11-5-18. PP62-63 & PP. 280-288
Ellis 11-5-18. PP. 40-42
16
Cotton PP. 52-58
17
Cotton PP.74-77
15

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 8

 complained that he was not being backed by other officers on certain calls where it is
proper procedure for officers to provide back-up. On another occasion, Ellis was berated
by another officer who arrived on the scene of a traffic stop made by Ellis. Not long
afterward, Ellis terminated his employment with HPD.18
23. In his final annual performance evaluation before leaving HPD in August, 2016, Ellis
receives an unfavorable review by Sgt. Herrera. Despite disagreeing with some of the
content of this review, Ellis did not submit a written challenge because he did not want to
“argue with Herrera about it anymore.” By this time, he was “finished with that
department” and wanted to leave without “having any more problems.” Moreover, because
the evaluation had already been reviewed by Capt. Blevins and Deputy Chief Dunlap, Ellis
didn’t want to cause any issues before his separation from HPD, primarily because his
appointment to the Lea County Sheriff’s Department had not yet been finalized and he
simply did not want “any more problems.” Ellis believes some of the statements in the
evaluation were not true, e.g., under the section titled initiative it reads, “Officer Ellis
usually allows other officers to respond first when it comes to high-risk calls or domestic
calls.” Ellis maintains he did not wait for other officers to arrive at calls before responding
to them.19
24. In his two-week notice memorandum informing HPD of his intent to resign, Ellis noticed a
handwritten comment, “three-day’ notice.” However, at the time he discussed the matter
with Capt. Blevins, he informed him that he would take two weeks’ vacation before his
actual separation date. Blevins told Ellis that would not be necessary and to simply let him
know the last day he would be physically working at HPD. Ellis informed him of the date
and Blevins responded that it was fine and there would be no issues with it. Ellis believes
the “three-day’ notice” comment makes it appear that he was leaving the department
without giving proper notice. It looks bad for future employment to indicate three days’
notice, when in fact it was more than two weeks that was discussed with Blevins. When
Blevins called him into his office to have the discussion, he asked Ellis if he was going to
be working elsewhere. This was before Ellis prepared his notice of resignation memo, and
at the time he told Blevins that his appointment to the Lea County Sheriff’s Department had
not yet been finalized. It was after this that Blevins advised Ellis on how to prepare the
notice memo.20
25. In his Exit Interview form, Ellis wrote that he didn’t think officers should be threatened
with write-ups, PIPs, bad evaluations or termination if they didn’t increase their
performance statistics. He further stated that if police supervisors have an issue with an
officer, they should discuss it with the officer instead of letting the officer continue to
“mess up” and later disciplining them for it or waiting to put it in their annual evaluation.
26. This was essentially Ellis’ opinion of the failed supervision at HPD. Ellis did not write in
his Exit Interview form anything about a quota system or the fact that he was being
discriminated against because he didn’t want that to adversely affect his opportunity for
future employment. In fact, Victor Hernandez of the Sheriff’s Department told Ellis to be
very careful what he put in writing about his previous employer so that he would not “mess
18

Cotton PP. 79-80
Ellis 11-5-18 PP 289-292, Exhibit F4
20
Ellis 11-5-18 P. 293, Exhibit F5
19

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 9

 up” his future employment with Lea County, or in case he wanted to return to HPD.21
27. In his employment interview with Lea County, attended by Chief Deputy Black, Chief
Deputy Boudreaux and Victor Hernandez, Ellis explained that his reason for leaving HPD
was that even though he was “having issues,” he did not want to speak badly about his
former employer. They responded to Ellis, “Thank you for doing that. We are aware of
some of the issues with that department.” Ellis decided to leave the Lea County Sheriff’s
Department when he learned that two former HPD officers were the newly elected sheriff
and undersheriff and he did not want to have any problems due to their strong relationship
with Chief McCall.22

Plaintiff Vasshawn Robinson
28. Officer Vasshawn Robinson joined the Hobbs PD upon his discharge from active duty
military service in November 2015. While in the military, Robinson served as an MP and
was deployed to Iraq in 2010. Robinson believes he was discriminated against from the
time he joined HPD, as demonstrated by the treatment he received from several of his FTOs
and Lt. Chad Wright during his probationary period. Things were so bad for Robinson that
he decided to take his complaints outside HPD when he contacted Joseph Cotton of the
Hobbs NAACP. Robinson was frustrated by the unfair treatment by his FTOs, Jeremy
Kirk, Jimmy Grimes and Matthew Burleson, and the failure of Lt. Wright to adequately
address his concerns. Subsequently, Cotton took these concerns to city officials, including
J.J. Murphy and Chief McCall. Robinson also believes that Chief McCall did nothing to
stop the poor treatment he received after it was made known inside HPD that Cotton had a
meeting with city officials regarding Robinson’s complaints.23
29. During the early part of 2016, Robinson endured progressively worse treatment by his
supervisors and some of his peers and faced formal disciplinary action for minor infractions
of the rules, while some of his non-minority peers who committed similar offenses were not
formally disciplined. Robinson was particularly disturbed by comments made by Lt.
Wright in a memorandum wherein he characterized Robinson as someone who does not
“own up to his mistakes,” and that he was insubordinate for not following the instructions
of his FTO, Jeremy Kirk. Robinson maintains that Lt. Wright was not being objective, in
that he had not personally observed Robinson’s performance, and generally treated him in a
racist manner. Lt. Wright, according to Robinson, didn’t know anything about him, and
was only taking the word of FTO Kirk, who was treating him unfairly throughout his field
training experience.24

21

Ellis 11-5-18 PP. 296-99, Exhibit F6
Ellis 11-5-18 PP. 301-305, Exhibit G1
23
Robinson P. 48, 52-59 & 74
24
Robinson P. 200, Exhibit D-4
22

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 10

 30. Lea County Deputy Victor Hernandez advised Robinson on filing his application for
employment with the Sheriff’s Department in March 2016. In that process, there was a
private meeting with Hernandez, who told Robinson not to say anything about his
application to HPD personnel because he “knew that they were going to blackball me.
That’s why we met secretly here at the JC, because he did not want Hobbs to know.
Because he knew that Chief McCall, Dunlap, and Wright would call the sheriff and not hire
me.” This conversation was witnessed by Jeremy Artis, who at that time had become a
deputy for the Sheriff’s Department. Hernandez insisted they meet secretly so as not to be
seen by anyone from HPD and encouraged Robinson to quickly complete and file his
employment application. Robinson indicated in his application that his reason for leaving
HPD was that he did not fit in with the “clique,” and because he was not a racist like others
at HPD. Robinson did not indicate any of the allegations of racism, harassment, and
retaliation among his reasons for leaving HPD because he was “terrified” of being
“blackballed” and perhaps forfeiting the opportunity to be employed by the Sheriff’s
Department.25
31. After his employment as a sheriff’s deputy, there was an incident at Robinson’s apartment
complex to which HPD Officer Burleson responded after receiving a call of males involved
in a fight. Robinson had been sent home due to allergies that left him with the symptom of
bloodshot, watery eyes. Accusing him of being intoxicated and DWI, Burleson attempted
to arrest Robinson and relieve him of his service weapon. An HPD supervisor intervened
and disallowed the arrest. Robinson believed this was another attempt to tarnish his
reputation and perhaps cause his termination from the Sheriff’s Department.26

Plaintiff Jeremy Artis
32. Officer Jeremy Artis began his career with HPD on February 23, 2016, after being
discharged from the U.S. Army, where he served as a military police officer at Fort
Campbell, KY. While serving in the Army, Artis was deployed to Afghanistan from 201112.
33. Artis recalls that during his probationary period at HPD in 2016, he reported to his FTO,
Arvin Sanjideh, that he was being mocked by fellow officers about his friendship with
Officer Robinson and believed this to be a form of harassment. Artis subsequently took the
matter up with his patrol sergeant, Maria Barrientes, who was present at the time he was
being mocked and ridiculed by other officers. In fact, Sgt. Barrientes joined Officers
Moen, Martinez and Blanchard in mocking Artis about his relationship with Vasshawn
Robinson. They were admonishing Artis not to be like Robinson, to follow instructions and
generally do what he is told while assigned to this particular shift. Artis said this behavior
25
26

Robinson PP. 213-217
Robinson PP. 231-239

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 11

 toward him was unwelcome, and he therefore no longer wanted to be a member of this
shift. He considered himself to be a “target” because of his friendship with Robinson, and
that his fellow officers were being “unprofessional” in their conduct toward him. Artis
believes their behavior could have been motivated by race, given that he is Anglo, and
Robinson is African American. Other new trainees on his shift were not subjected to the
same ridicule and insults that he endured.27

34. Officer Artis was disturbed by several incidents that occurred in the spring of 2016 while
he was in the field training program. The first involved Officer Jeremy Kirk who was on
patrol with his K-9 service dog in the area of Main and Turner on the east side of Hobbs, a
predominately African American neighborhood. Kirk made a vehicle stop, during which
his service dog alerted to the possibility of narcotics inside the vehicle. Somehow, Kirk
obtained consent from the operator to search the vehicle without a warrant and drugs were
recovered. The operator was arrested, but Artis believes he was coerced into giving
consent to search his vehicle and was intimidated by the presence of the K-9 service dog.
Artis believed this to be unconstitutional and complained to his FTO, Sanjideh.28
35. In another incident, while on patrol in the early morning hours with FTO Sanjideh, they
engaged two older African American males on the east side of Hobbs near Snyder, who
were sitting in a vehicle parked in a driveway. The initial investigation revealed the males
actually lived at the residence where they were parked, and the officers resumed patrol.
When the vehicle and its occupants left the driveway to go to the rear of the residence, FTO
Sanjideh decided to further investigate the males without probable cause that a crime had
been or was about to be committed by the males. Artis believed this to be a form of
harassment, particularly because this too was in the African American area of the city, and
that the stop was made solely of the basis of “the color of their skin.” He spoke to the FTO
about why he believed this matter was not handled in accordance with HPD policy and
procedure.29
36. To Officer Artis, these two incidents were reflective of a pattern and practice of HPD
officers making unlawful stops of pedestrians and vehicles occupied by African Americans
in the south and east areas of Hobbs during his tenure at HPD. Artis believed these stops,
both pedestrian in the roadway and vehicle, to be “petty.” Many of these stops resulted in
some type of enforcement action, including arrests. Artis shared his concerns with Officers
Ellis and Robinson, who in turn presented them to Joseph Cotton. Moreover, Artis was
very concerned about the level of harassment and criticism being leveled at his friend,

27

Artis PP. 15-16, 22-23 & 98-100, Exhibit C
Artis PP. 112 & 125-133
29
Artis PP. 134-152
28

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 12

 Vasshawn, whom he tried to help improve his quality of experience at HPD whenever he
could.30
37. In the spring of 2016, Artis applied for employment with the Lea County Sheriff’s
Department and indicated in his employment application that he was leaving HPD because
new officers there were not being supported by some of their supervisors and fellow
officers. He believed there was disunity, disorganization and a general lack of trust among
the staff at HPD.
38. Officers Artis and Robinson met several times with the LCSD hiring officer, Deputy Victor
Hernandez, mostly near the ball field in order to avoid being seen by HPD personnel who
would frequent the county justice center where the sheriff’s department is located.
Hernandez expressed his concerns about retaliation by some officers at HPD. Artis told
Hernandez that he had been harassed, criticized and retaliated against by his fellow officers
at HPD, due largely to his friendship with Robinson. Artis chose not to include this
information in his employment application with LCSD for fear of further retaliation, and
possibly, rejection of his application for employment. In fact, Hernandez advised Artis not
to include this information in his application because HPD would certainly be contacted in
the hiring process, and if aware of these facts, might impose more retaliation while Artis
remained in their employ. In his effort to leave HPD in May 2016 on the best possible
terms, and to guard against hurting his chances for employment with LCSD, Artis neither
specified his actual reasons for leaving HPD nor his future employment status in his
resignation letter or exit interview questionnaire.31
39. In September 2016, HPD officers responded to the Artis’ residence to investigate a
complaint of domestic violence allegedly involving Artis and his fiancé, Angelica
Gonzales. A call from Ms. Gonzales’ grandfather in Orlando, FL had officers dispatched to
the scene. One of those officers was Jimmy Grimes, one of Artis’ former FTOs at HPD.
Supervisors from LCSD also responded to the scene, and ultimately New Mexico State
Police took control of the investigation, which was determined to be unfounded. Still, in
the process of investigating this matter, Officer Grimes sought to obtain an arrest warrant
for Deputy Artis even though neither he nor HPD had jurisdictional authority in the
investigation. Artis believes Grimes did this to retaliate against him for his experiences at
HPD and to harm his reputation at LCSD. Ultimately, this matter was classified as
unfounded and closed by the State Police.32
40. Eventually, Artis filed an application with the Sandoval County, NM Sheriff’s Office
because he and his fiancé wanted to leave the Hobbs area. Artis believed he was
continually being harassed by certain HPD officers who would drive by his residence at
30

Artis PP. 151-154
Artis PP. 180-83, 185-86 & 190-97, Exhibits D, E and F
32
Artis PP. 212-228, Exhibit G
31

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 13

 “odd hours,” as recorded by his home surveillance system. Despite several interviews with
the hiring manager at Sandoval County, who told Artis that everything would be fine, he
just needed to complete the background and speak with his current and previous employer.
Artis never heard anything more from the SCSO and continued his employment at Lea
County SD. In fact, fellow LCSD deputy, Zane Brown, told Artis that Lt. Shane Blevins
and other HPD officers “made fun of him” and vowed to “blackball” Artis from gaining
employment with any law enforcement agency. Artis had a similar experience in his
unsuccessful bid for employment with the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Department, after one
of their hiring officers visited HPD as part of the background check.33
41. Artis also believes that he was denied an opportunity to serve on the Lea County multijurisdictional task force to which he applied while serving as a LCSD deputy. Sheriff
Byron Wester has assured Artis that because of his good performance record and the
positive comments from Chief McCall regarding his tenure at HPD that he would have no
problem getting this coveted assignment. Ultimately, he was not chosen because neither
Chief McCall nor Chief Jones of the Eunice PD approved his appointment to the task force.
Artis believes the decision to deny him this opportunity stems from his lawsuit and will
hinder his future law enforcement professional career. 34

33
34

Artis PP. 229-231, 234-237 & 241-246, Exhibits I-1, I-2, J-1
Artis PP. 263-265

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 14

 Hobbs Police Department Operations
42. Three months after Plaintiff Ellis joined the Hobbs Police Department, John J. Murphy
became the city manager of Hobbs in September of 201235.Defendant Murphy visited the
police department on his first day as city manager and found that the morale was
“terrible.” He thought that the department needed to do a better job building external
relationships and practicing “Community Policing.”36
43. Christopher McCall becomes Murphy’s first hire as City Manager in Hobbs taking place
shortly after his arrival.37 Defendant Murphy acknowledges that he did not review
Defendant McCall’s personnel and internal affairs records38. As a part of performing “due
diligence,” standard practice for any city manager, especially when just entering into an
unfamiliar municipal government, would have been to conduct a full background
investigation on any department head, especially those heading emergency services
agencies.
44. Defendant. Murphy also acknowledges that he made no effort to be briefed or to read the
aforementioned Stipulated Agreement or any associated reports, summaries or other
materials which reflected an important history of the Hobbs Police Department.39 The
Stipulated Agreement mandated certain actions on the part of HPD to remedy and prevent
racial discrimination in policing. These enumerated actions are an important part of the
discussion of our present case.

45. Relevant mandated actions of the Stipulated Agreement included:
a. Detentions, Searches and Seizures
b. Review of Certain Arrests and Charges
c. Citizen Complaints and Internal Affairs
d. Training
e. Information Systems40
46. The depositions of Defendant Herrera and Officer Berdoza are quite descriptive about the
manner in which stops, contacts and arrests are conducted by the members on Defendant
Herrera’s shift. It is clear the there was a well-established system of using the charge,
“Pedestrian in the Roadway” to increase their “stop” numbers. The number of stops made
by Hobbs Police Officers has clearly been the primary performance indicator for patrol
officers in the department.41
35

Murphy P. 40
Murphy P.83
37
Murphy P.85-89
38
Murphy P.85-22
39
Murphy p. 88-89
40
Stipulated Agreement NO.CIV 99-00348 MV/WWD-ACE
36

41

Herrera pp. 132-146 and Berdoza, pp. 72-81 and 87-90

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 15

 47. A very high premium is placed on the number of stops an officer makes since it is the
primary determiner of monthly activity. Defendant Herrera speaks directly to “friendly
competition” between shifts for the bragging rights of being the squad with the most stops
and contacts for the month.42 He denies that he set quotas for his subordinates, but he
does say that he …” would throw(sic) out a (numeric) goal” for the upcoming tour of
duty.43
48. Every supervisor in Plaintiff Ellis’ chain of command affirmed that individual and shift
records of stops were published, distributed and reinforced monthly. Defendant Herrera
described how monthly productivity reports, referred to as “scandal sheets” in some
departments, were placed on the sergeants’ desks for discussion during briefings44.
49. Sergeant Ahmaad White says that when he was an officer in patrol, he got “stats” on a
monthly basis in his mailbox. 45
50. Former Sergeant Joe Wall was even more descriptive. “All members of the HPD Patrol
Division were now being pressured to make stops and arrests during McCall's tenure
as Police Chief. Officers' monthly "stats" were now being posted in the HPD Squad
Room. It was the general consensus in Patrol Division that this was done to shame
officers into making more arrests and writing more traffic.”46
51. The standard practice is for the supervisor to review key performance indicators in
conjunction with regular performance appraisal sessions with each individual subordinate
where “productivity” is but one of the dimensions assessed. The quality of the
subordinates’ work would be another primary dimension to be monitored and discussed
as a part of a comprehensive performance appraisal. The next person up the chain, in this
case a lieutenant, oversees this process and ensures that evaluations are fair and accurate.
52. Officer Berdoza talks about the emphasis on contacts and stops within the department and
on his squad. He and his supervisor, Defendant Herrera, talk about shift and daily “goals,”
indicating that they are not quotas.47 In most departments, the ability to make stops and
contacts is driven by the available time that officers have when not responding to
dispatched calls for service. In today’s departments, the call for service volume allows for
little uncommitted time to engage in self-initiated activities.
53. Most departments give patrol officers direction or “directed patrol activities” which are
based on crime analysis and the officer is told what tactics to employ and what kind of
activity or crime is the target. Defendant Herrera gave no indication that he gave this kind
of direction to his subordinates.
42

Herrera p.135
Herrera p. 134
44
Herrera p.132
45
White p. 23
46
Wall, Hobbs Confidential 1242
47
Berdoza pp. 72-81and 87-90 and Herrera, pp. 132-146
43

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 16

 54. Field Training Officers are typically chosen from among the best patrol officers in the
department. They are charged with training new recruits and lateral officers and certify
them as certified to patrol alone or recommend that they are unfit to serve as police
officers. They are role models and are typically selected based on above average
performance evaluations and exemplary conduct. Despite his admitted disciplinary
history, Officer Berdoza was selected to become a Field Training Officer in January 2017
and was also assigned to SWAT where, much like FTO positions, only the departments’
most responsible, reliable and tactically proficient officers can serve.
55. As a part of his FTO duties, Officer Berdoza describes in great detail how he trains
recruits to enforce the “Pedestrian in the Roadway” Statute. The manner of his instruction
is not the standard practice for this type of pedestrian violation.48 The spirit of the statute
is a provision for someone who is obstructing the free flow of traffic or in some manner
creating a hazard in the roadway. The only other time that officers might be instructed to
enforce the statute would occur when there had been an increase in the number of
pedestrian related traffic crashes at a designated intersection or location.
56. Charges such as “Pedestrian in the Roadway” are typically seen as very low level,
discretionary charges which are most often handled by verbal warnings from an officer in
an attempt to educate an offender rather than citing them. Today, most departments will
chastise officers who actually cite these “hummers” because they recognize that the
officer is ordinarily reacting to a less than polite motorist or pedestrian or that they are
padding their enforcement activities. Sergeant White refers to this type of stop as a
“chump” stop. 49
57. Defendant Murphy acknowledges that when he learned from Joe Cotton that
discriminatory stops were occurring in the south and east sides of town that he ordered
Defendant McCall to stop and to have officers, “…spend more time on community
policing” and to spend their time on more crime related problems.50 There is no indication
that the practice was abated, and that Defendant McCall attempted to downplay the nature
and level of the activity to his supervisor.
58. Sergeant White talks about his interpretation of the “Pedestrian in the Roadway” statute
and notes that he has only addressed someone who is impeding traffic. He goes on to
indicate that the “Pedestrian in the Roadway” statute was not a topic of instruction when
he was an academy instructor or an FTO.51
59. Based largely on Field Training Officer Berdoza’s description of his own stops for
“Pedestrian in the Roadway,”52 it would appear that making stops for highly discretionary
offenses was used as a method to gain the identity of a motorist in a Pretexual manner to
48

Berdoza P. 40
White P. 85
50
Murphy P. 121
51
White P. 18
49

52

Berdoza PP. 40-42

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 17

 be able to run them for “wants or warrants.” This is derisively known as “trolling.” Even
when used in a limited, focused attempt to interdict specific well known crime patterns,
departments as a practice, make their commanders and officers understand what kind of
impact that this can have on a minority community and they take training and public
awareness efforts to ensure that they have stakeholder understanding and acceptance of
the practice. Defendant Hobbs PD Command Staff Officers and their subordinates
deposed in the present case were completely unaware of this or chose to ignore it until
Joseph Cotton made it an issue with Defendant Murphy and Defendant McCall.
60. Officer Berdoza describes several field activities that, on their face, run counter to
standard police practices and are likely, unconstitutional. His descriptions of the way he
handles his contacts and stops lack articulable suspicion and he tells people that they can
be arrested for concealing their identity when he believes they are likely wanted on
warrants. 53
61. He is also using the terms “contact” and “stop” interchangeably.54 Historically, “contact”
has referred to a citizen encounter where the citizen is free to go and is not compelled to
answer any questions. The standard practice has moved toward elimination of the
“contact” because of misuse, misunderstanding and abuse. The best practice is a
published policy that instructs officers to tell citizens that their cooperation is completely
voluntary and that they have the right to refuse to answer questions and may continue on
their way.
62. Sergeant White, when given a set of circumstances similar to those given Berdoza,
correctly indicates that the person being stopped may refuse to answer questions and has
no obligation to identify themselves.55
63. The data available to us in the CAD Pedestrian Stops and the Declaration of William S.
Cooper56 clearly illustrate a disproportionate number of these stops in the Patrol Zones on
the east and south sides of Hobbs. Mr. Cooper’s analysis concludes that 82% of all
pedestrian stops in Hobbs were conducted in these three patrol zones where 80% of the
population is minority57. These numbers compare to the citywide minority population
which is 56.8% Latino and 6.1% African American58.
64. The notion that the bulk of the crime that occurs in Hobbs is located in the south and east
sides of town is de-bunked by Sergeant White who was formerly a patrol sergeant and is
now in the Criminal Investigations Division. He describes the crime patterns that exist
throughout the entire city.59

53

Berdoza PP. 33, 43-46
Berdoza P. 46
55
White P. 55
56
Cooper P.3
57
Cooper P.3
58
Cooper P.3,
54

59

White PP. 10, 23 & 55

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 18

 65. Officer Berdoza claims that he makes stops and contacts all over the city but upon closer
examination, the overwhelming number of his citations for “Pedestrian in the Roadway”
between July 26, 2016 and January 26, 2017, were written in the Patrol Areas in the east
and south sides of Hobbs.60
66. Officer Berdoza speaks to the discretion that the officer has to document the stop or
not.61This misguided notion about officer and supervisor discretion in relation to
operational and personnel documentation is repeated by Defendants McCall, Herrera and
Blevins.62

60

Berdoza PP. 72-89
Berdoza P. 44
62
Herrera PP. 55-56, Blevins P. 44, McCall P. 27
61

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 19

 Hobbs Police Department Administration

67.

Defendant Murphy disclosed the fact that he had been told that there was a “Buddy
System” in the Hobbs Police Department. There is no information which would lead me
to believe that he looked into this. He mistakenly believes that it is probably like the
camaraderie that he had experienced in the military.63 Deponent Officer Jenna Ford is
forthright in identifying Defendants McCall, Dunlap, Wright and Blevins along with
others as a buddy system within the Hobbs Police Department.64 Defendant Murphy
saw nothing wrong with buddies working together and no one brought any information
to him about the buddy system being engaged in any misconduct or that there was fear
of retaliation because of the buddy system.65 Current and former Hobbs Police
Department members provide information about how the Defendant members of the
department and those who were in their inner circle benefitted by getting promotions
and choice assignments. They also relate how unconstitutional and racially
discriminatory behavior was not only ignored or dismissed but condoned and
encouraged by the monthly competition between shifts for stops and contacts.

68.

Much like officers who “bend” the constitution to conduct illegal stops and searches of
largely minority victims and aid their buddies who would otherwise be identified in the
complaint system or criminal proceedings, likewise, the buddies in the Hobbs Police
Department used the strength of their clique to punish those who dared to not “get with
the program” or go along with it. They saved particular venom and retaliation for
“Blue Falcons” or those who “burned blue” and reported the misconduct of other
officers.66 It never dawned on Defendant Murphy that no one would approach him
about a buddy system unless there was something wrong with it.

69.

In his affidavit, retired Hobbs Police Department sergeant, Joe Wall independently
identifies Defendants McCall, Dunlap and Blevins as the core of a system of Hobbs
command staff members, supervisors and officers whose friendship with each other
supported a system of unconstitutional policing and unequal, discriminatory and
disproportionate disciplinary action and retaliation against those who challenged their
activities.67

70.

On or about August 19, 2014, Defendant Berdoza used a variation of the N-word in the
briefing room in front of Plaintiff Ellis and other officers. While the record is clear that
Officer Ellis’ complaint about Officer Berdoza’s use of the N-word was made to
Clipper Miller, a lieutenant at the time, who says that he doesn’t remember it.68 All of
the defendants who were questioned about the propriety of Officer Berdoza’s use of this
particular variation of the N-word indicate that Berdoza felt comfortable using the word
since he had done so around friends that he had grown up with or had played basketball

63

Murphy P. 166
Ford P. 71
65
Murphy P. 167 and Wall Hobbs Confidential PP. 1244-1234
66
Ford PP. 64-65
67
Wall PP. 1243-1244
68
Miller P.12
64

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 20

 with. Officer Berdoza admits to the misconduct.69 Defendant Herrera indicates that,
because of the size of the Hobbs Police Department, every command officer in the
department, including Defendant McCall, had to have knowledge of the incident and
the complaint.70
71.

I fully understand that this particular variation of the N-word is sometimes used by
persons other than African Americans in the presence of African Americans who have
accepted these persons are close friends and that, by their lack of protestation, have
made it permissible for them to use this slang version of the N-word. While I
understand that this kind of relationship exists among various groups of people, it’s use
in the law enforcement workplace is not appropriate under any circumstances other than
citing a quote for official purposes.

72.

Defendant Herrera had previously counselled Defendant Berdoza on his use of “slang’
while on duty and in the station.71 His use of the N-word was not his first offense of this
type and, based on Sergeant Herrera’s “counselling,” previous verbal admonishment
was not successful in curbing this misconduct on the part of Berdoza.

73.

Each of the deponents in Defendant Berdoza and Defendant Herrera’s chain of
command indicate that there was not a Hobbs Police Department directive that made
Berdoza’s statement a violation. Every department that I have worked with or reviewed
has had a directive that outlined “Conduct Unbecoming an Officer,” often abbreviated
“CUBO.” At a minimum, Defendant Berdoza’s conduct was unbecoming an officer and
placed the department and himself in jeopardy and open to sanctions for disparate
treatment and discrimination.

74.

Defendant Herrera, however, acknowledged documents created by Defendant Bevins,
which describe a series of Herrera’s decisions and actions which point to his
shortcomings as a police supervisor. These acts reflect a lack of attention to detail,
taking shortcuts and inappropriately delegating his supervisory duties to subordinates.
No serious disciplinary action was taken against Defendant Herrera despite being
counselled for acts which might have cost him his rank in most similarly situated police
departments.72 One particularly disturbing inquiry involves Herrera’s possible
participation in retaliatory acts against a plaintiff who filed a lawsuit against the City of
Hobbs and a Hobbs police officer73.

75.

Defendant McCall talks at length about the benefits to the Hobbs Police Department
that resulted from the Stipulated Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement. In
his deposition, he said, “You know, it (the Stipulated Agreement) changed operating
procedures. It changed how things occurred, how information was gathered, how
information was documented. I think - - I think, from the Stipulated Agreement (sic),
we created a lot of procedures and policies that benefit us, that has put us kind of in

69

Berdoza P. 116
Herrera P. 117
71
Herrera P. 94
72
Herrera P. 30
73
Herrera PP. 75-76
70

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 21

 front of a lot of agencies in this state that are just starting to catch up to it.”74
76.

The procedures and policies that were put into place to comply with the Stipulated
Agreement and accreditation by CALEA appear to have been eliminated or
deconstructed during Defendant McCall’s tenure as Police Chief and Defendant
Murphy’s time as City Manager. The record in this case is replete with Hobbs Police
Department policies and practices that are not standard policy and practice for similarly
situated departments. I mentioned in the “Scope of this Report” sections of my Initial
Expert Report and this, my Final Expert Report, the shortcut analysis model used by
many police professionals and court decree monitors to succinctly evaluate a police
department’s policies, training, supervision and discipline systems75. In an effort to be
succinct, I’ll organize my comments over the four areas that I mentioned above.

Policies
77. Defendants and deponents in this case cannot identify a specific policy that Officer Berdoza
was in violation of when it was alleged that he had used a variation of the N-word in a City
of Hobbs workplace. They also describe misconduct that would have required written
reporting and investigation in most other police departments. Neither Defendant McCall
nor Defendant Murphy could attest to the existence of an affirmative action plan for the
Hobbs Police Department.76
Training
78. There is almost universal agreement among deponents that the department had not held bias
free policing training or any other standard police training on the issues of procedural
justice, implicit bias or other similar course during their careers. In a response to a question
posed to Defendant McCall in his deposition about whether the department had any training
in how the Equal Protection Clause prohibits raced-based suspicion, he indicates that they
had unconscious bias training within the year. He could not, however, produce materials
from the class and he is the only Defendant or deponent who could point to any training of
this type in the Hobbs Police Department in recent memory.77
Supervision
79. The conduct and performance of Defendant Herrera raise serious questions about the
standards employed in the Hobbs Police Department in selecting patrol supervisors, the
guidance that was given to them upon their promotion and the oversight and accountability
exercised by their superior officers who are charged with the responsibility of evaluating
their performance and correcting improper or misguided behavior. While there is evidence
of standard professional performance of their supervisory duties by both current and former
Hobbs Police Department patrol supervisors, Defendant Herrera’s promotion to sergeant
74

McCall P. 99
This standard of analysis was originally coined, PTSD by Dennis Nowicki, former chief of the Charlotte S.C. Police
Department and long-time police practices expert and monitor.
76
McCall P. 127-129, Murphy P. 168
77
McCall p. 127-128
75

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 22

 with his documented misconduct prior to his promotion and the supervisory missteps he
made following his promotion are not a reflection of the standard patrol supervisory
performance seen in the industry.
80. Most of the actions that were taken against Officer Berdoza, including those taken by
Defendant Herrera, deserved discipline beyond undocumented oral counselling. Defendant
Murphy recognized that his use of any variation of the N-word deserved “at least a day
off.”78 Defendant Murphy also acknowledged that when he had potentially serious and
libelous issues that involved Defendant McCall, he called him to his office and talked to
him but failed to document the meetings and did not follow up to determine if his directions
were followed.79
81. Even after Defendant Murphy was visited by former Sergeant Joe Wall in 2013 who told
him that there was a system of retaliation and unjust treatment being carried out by
Defendant McCall and his primary subordinates, the former city manager took no action to
investigate these accusations. Instead, Murphy told former Sergeant Wall that he didn’t
believe him, all the while questioning Mr. Wall about whether he might be recording the
conversation between the two of them.80
Discipline
82. Defendant members of the Hobbs Police Department and other deposed command staff
members all subscribe to a management philosophy that has adopted undocumented
counselling as an accepted method of discipline expanding the limits beyond industry
standards. Most departments have moved to documenting what was historically categorized
as an “oral reprimand.” Reprimands are now official discipline and a permanent part of an
officer’s personnel file and the oral reprimand is now a written counselling which is a
temporary document in a personnel file or a supervisor’s file which becomes part of the
performance appraisal system.
83. Most police departments now have some form of early warning or early intervention
system where data is maintained on a variety of categories and compared to a norm.
Typically, they include complaints, uses of force and acts of misconduct. A second set of
data elements have emerged as standard measures associated with bias-free policing. The
industry standard has become an analysis of vehicle and pedestrian stops, vehicle searches,
arrests and field interviews. The data is analyzed for patterns that reflect disproportionate
interaction with specific races or ethnicities, genders, ages or other protected classes.
84. Defendant McCall describes the failure of the Hobbs Police Department to have some sort
of early intervention system for most of the years that he was police chief. He cites the
numerous problems with various Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) and Records
Management Systems (RMS) maintained by the Hobbs Police Department81. He cites the
shortcomings and failures of the computer systems utilized to capture officer activity.
78

Murphy p. 110
Murphy p. 104, 123, 125
80
Wall p. 3
81
Wall p. 3
79

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 23

 85. Beginning with New World from 2012 to 2016, Capers through 2016, no record
management system was capable of capturing traffic and pedestrian stop and search data
nor reliable data elements for the early intervention system. Not until 2017 did the Hobbs
Police Department purchase and install the Spillman RMS which finally appears to be
working since Defendant Blevins, in his deposition, indicates that he just recently was
identified as having triggered an alert for his uses of force within the monitored period.82
86. Defendant McCall indicates that the citation system for the state of New Mexico has no
data field in it to capture the race or ethnicity
87. Defendants and deponents report that the Hobbs Police Department has no Disciplinary
Matrix or Table of Penalties for infractions and/or acts of misconduct to be utilized in
meting out discipline and corrective action for members of the department.83 This is not
standard practice for most of the police departments in the United States. Deponents relate
that such a table was created while the department was under the Stipulated Agreement but
was discontinued following contract negotiations with the bargaining unit84.
88. This is the most unusual of circumstances since most Disciplinary Matrices or Table of
Penalties are most often demanded by unions and collective bargaining associations when
there is a pattern of inconsistent discipline being administered to those who are not in the
social relationships between employees and command staff.
89. I would also note that the lack of an adequate RMS and/or EIS system in a department this
size should not have been a problem for five years. Most departments that voluntarily, or
those mandated to, capture the race/ethnicity, gender and age, where possible, of every
person that they stop, search or arrest, have done so within their Computer-Aided Dispatch
systems. Many of those departments are much larger than the Hobbs Police Department.
90. While stop, search and arrest data must be computerized to conduct any credible analysis,
data on allegations of misconduct and uses of force, can be meaningful when listed on a
simple spreadsheet when you have fewer than one hundred officers. This was exactly the
method that I employed as the monitor for the aforementioned Supplement to the Stipulated
Agreement.

82

Blevins. P. 85
McCall P. 162; Blevins. P. 20
84
McCall, Dunlap, Blevins, Herrera
83

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 24

 V.

CONCLUSIONS

91. Plaintiff Ellis had been an employee of the Hobbs New Mexico Police Department long
enough to know and understand that the manner in which some members unjustly targeted
minorities in the south and east Patrol Areas by making highly discretionary stops and
contacts was in an effort to satisfy their superiors pressure for them to aggressively make
stops and arrests.
92. Despite having less time in the Hobbs Police Department, Plaintiffs Robinson and Artis
had been military police officers and were therefore knowledgeable about
unconstitutional stops, searches and arrests and the complicit behavior of supervisors
and command staff which allowed these conditions to exist. All three Plaintiffs were also
keenly aware that a system of favoritism, punishment and retaliation was exacted upon
members who failed to participate in the illegal and unconstitutional policing activities.
They also knew that reporting this behavior within the organization fell on deaf ,
uncaring ears.
93. A reasonable basis existed in fact as evidenced by the facts available to the Plaintiffs
who were public employees.
94. Plaintiffs had reasonable basis to believe that their coworkers and supervisors had
acted unlawfully and improperly; and when they reported that misconduct, Plaintiffs acted
in good faith.
95. Plaintiffs communicated to their public employer, the Hobbs Police Department, and a
third party, Joseph Cotton, information about their treatment by the command staff of the
Hobbs Police Department an action or failure to act that the Plaintiffs believed in good faith
constitutes an unlawful or improper act.

96. By reporting the misconduct and discrimination at the Hobbs Police Department and
unveiling the culture, Plaintiffs engaged in activities expressly protected by § 10-16C-2E
and § 10-16C-3 A and B of the New Mexico Whistleblower Protection Act.
97. Plaintiffs unveiled the illegal practices and racial discrimination at the Hobbs Police
Department and were then targeted for discipline and retaliation by HPD Defendant
Command Staff members and their compatriots.
98. Defendants violated the Whistleblower Protection Act by retaliating against Plaintiffs
for engaging in these activities through consistent harassment during the remainder of
Plaintiffs’ tenure at the Hobbs Police Department and through their attempts at preventing
Plaintiffs from seeking further employment elsewhere.

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 25

 99. As a direct result of HPD’s illegal retaliation against Plaintiffs, they are and continue
to be damaged in countless ways including, but not limited to, lost past and future wages,
lost employment benefits, lost overtime, humiliation including loss of professional reputation
and standing, loss of opportunities for promotions, emotional distress and other
compensatory damages.

Robert L. Stewart
September 14, 2019

Final Expert Report of Robert L. Stewart

Page 26