View Full Version : Can someone help me understand the difference between Sheriffs and P. Chiefs?
DreadPirateMoyer
02-28-13, 11:27
In general, of course.
I read Wikipedia on the subject, and it's still not clear, especially considering it varies by state.
So, as a matter of general philosophy and purpose, what is the difference between a sheriff and police chief (or other LEO leader)? What roles do they fulfill? What jobs do they do?
From what I understand, the Sheriff is elected by the people and Chief of Police is selected and appointed by whoever is in charge.
Among other differences; where I'm at police are city while Sheriffs are county.
Among other differences; where I'm at police are city while Sheriffs are county.
This. To make things even more confusing, we county police too. Sheriffs report to the people. PC report to their superiors that appointed them, mayor, county executive etc.
DreadPirateMoyer
02-28-13, 12:26
Sheriffs are elected, police chiefs are appointed. Check. Sheriffs are county, appointed police leaders may or may not be. Check.
What is the role of a sheriff, then? Why does such a position exist? Especially in places where there are also county and state police departments? Essentially, what does a Sheriff do that's different than police and warrants the position's existence?
The original role of the Sheriff was as the officer of the court. Warrants are issued and it's the job of the Sheriff and his deputies to serve those warrants. The Sheriff is the HIGHEST LEO in a State, at least in Indiana it's this way. Only the coroner has arrest powers over a sheriff(this is to keep politics or corruption in a city or state LEA from removing said Sheriff). Federal Agencies must abide by what the sheriff in said county dictates.
Here in Indiana many of the duties of what Sheriff Departments do now outside of serving warrants and other duties of the court system, the State Police were supposed to do. ISP was originally to do all county road and highway patrolling and answer calls. Sheriff Dept's were meant to serve the courts and nothing more.
Being a Sheriff Dept's kid(dads got 30 years in March) and at one time being a criminal justice major, I've learned the long history of the courts system and the role the sheriff and his deputies have.
County Police are just that, a county police force that doesn't work for the Court system.
The original role of the Sheriff was as the officer of the court. Warrants are issued and it's the job of the Sheriff and his deputies to serve those warrants. The Sheriff is the HIGHEST LEO in a State, at least in Indiana it's this way. Only the coroner has arrest powers over a sheriff(this is to keep politics or corruption in a city or state LEA from removing said Sheriff). Federal Agencies must abide by what the sheriff in said county dictates.
Here in Indiana many of the duties of what Sheriff Departments do now outside of serving warrants and other duties of the court system, the State Police were supposed to do. ISP was originally to do all county road and highway patrolling and answer calls. Sheriff Dept's were meant to serve the courts and nothing more.
Being a Sheriff Dept's kid(dads got 30 years in March) and at one time being a criminal justice major, I've learned the long history of the courts system and the role the sheriff and his deputies have.
County Police are just that, a county police force that doesn't work for the Court system.
Same here in Oklahoma. Also (here) the jurisdiction of a sheriff or deputy is the entire state. For a police officer, the jurisdiction is within the drawn boundaries of the municipality they serve, absent a MOU or MOA covering extended jurisdiction. For instance, the PD in my AOR is "cross-deputized" with the county sheriff's office, so they have additional authorities not expressly granted to PO's.
I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that in most cases, SO's are much more poorly funded than PD's. We're kind of like the USMC of the law enforcement community! :D
CarlosDJackal
02-28-13, 16:16
It usually depends on your state but what is generally true is Sheriffs are the elected Chief Law Enforcement Officer for his jurisdiction whereas a Police Chief is hired by the Mayor or Executives of that jurisdiction to lead the Police Departments (which is different from Sheriffs Officer or Department).
In the case of Virginia, the Sheriff and his Deputies can legally take over cases from other LEOs within their jurisdictions to include State Troopers (as per Virginia Code). Sheriffs and their Deputies have the ability to write tickets under either their jurisdiction's code or their State's code. In a lot of cases, City or County politicos decide to create a Police Department because they find that they did not like being able to pull the strings of the elected Sheriff. In doing so they increase the tax burden on their constituents (something more voters are not aware of) because the funding for local Police Departments usually comes from the jurisdictions they were hired to patrol. Sheriffs, on the other hand, receive part of their funding from the State.
Sheriff's Deputies are also very different from Police Officers in that they are "Deputized" which means they automatically inherit the same authority as the Sheriff. The Sheriff has to explicitly limit their authority by policy should he choose to do so. On the other hand, Police Officers are hired and do not automatically receive the same authority as their Chief. Outside of the authority that are explicitly provided by State, County or City code; that is. Sheriffs have authority to enforce Civil, Traffic and Criminal code whereas Police Departments usually do not have the authority to enforce Civil Code and very little authority (if any) in the Courthouse.
A lot of Sheriffs Offices also have the distinction of having a direct lineage to the Sheriffs of the Old World, long before the American Revolution. The one I used to belong to was founded in 1745.
Keep in mind that there are variations on this depending on the state. In some states Sheriffs and Sheriffs Deputies can only perform civil processes and prisoner transportation and are not allowed to carry a concealed firearm using their badges. In Virginia, a lot of jurisdictions do not have Police Departments because (a) they don't need it; (b) they cannot afford it; and (c) The Sheriffs Office already performs the duties they would be tasked to do.
I hope this helps.
Game Wardens here have the highest jurisdiction as they can enforce any law plus the game laws.
Alaskapopo
02-28-13, 16:39
The original role of the Sheriff was as the officer of the court. Warrants are issued and it's the job of the Sheriff and his deputies to serve those warrants. The Sheriff is the HIGHEST LEO in a State, at least in Indiana it's this way. Only the coroner has arrest powers over a sheriff(this is to keep politics or corruption in a city or state LEA from removing said Sheriff). Federal Agencies must abide by what the sheriff in said county dictates.
Here in Indiana many of the duties of what Sheriff Departments do now outside of serving warrants and other duties of the court system, the State Police were supposed to do. ISP was originally to do all county road and highway patrolling and answer calls. Sheriff Dept's were meant to serve the courts and nothing more.
Being a Sheriff Dept's kid(dads got 30 years in March) and at one time being a criminal justice major, I've learned the long history of the courts system and the role the sheriff and his deputies have.
County Police are just that, a county police force that doesn't work for the Court system.
We don't have Sheriff's up here and all state and local law enforcement is certified from the same authority and we have arrest powers anywhere in the state regardless if your a local cop or a state cop. Down there what do you mean by a higher arresting authority. It would appear you either have it or you don't. (arrest powers)
Pat
We don't have Sheriff's up here and all state and local law enforcement is certified from the same authority and we have arrest powers anywhere in the state regardless if your a local cop or a state cop. Down there what do you mean by a higher arresting authority. It would appear you either have it or you don't. (arrest powers)
Pat
Arrest powers can be limited in scope by the issuing/accreditation authority. In Oklahoma, it's the Council on Law Enforcement Education & Training (CLEET). Going through the academy, we were trained on the difference between the authority of the sheriff and a police officer. I.E., the sheriff of a county has the highest powers of arrest in the ocunty, even over municipal and state police officers. Also, a PD can run a temporary detention facility, but only for the purposes of facilitating transfer to a county jail. Only the county can operate an accredited jail facility. Most PD's don't have much more than a holding cell or two, and some not even that.
THE SHERIFF - POLITICALLY SPEAKING
The Sheriff offers the people under his county jurisdiction, the most effective liaison to law enforcement. When citizens have a complaint concerning some problem in their county, the Sheriff is ultimately their best remedy. Although modern times have placed more glamorous attention on local and state police, they create a myriad of problems in reality.
The Sheriff can respond faster to any citizen’s complaint then any police department. This is one of the many forgotten powers of the Sheriff in the minds of the citizenry. His fast and efficient abilities for handling such concerns are derived from his constitutional foundation.
As an elected law enforcement representative, he has great political power on the direction, time spent, and discretion of any request from a constituent. This is in stark contrast to the bureaucratic red tape of the modern, contracted police authority.
LEGAL POWER OF THE SHERIFF
Today, especially in the northeast portion of the United States, there is some controversy over the legal power and authority of the modern day sheriffs. A March-April 2000 issue of Sheriff magazine addressed this issue head-on and appears to be the most recent clarification of the sheriff authority. Even though the title has been altered at times within the last 1200 years, the legal authority has remained almost fully resistant to change.
Looking at a six (6) year old Pennsylvania Supreme Court case, the court held that the "constitutionally designated sheriff in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is a law enforcement officer who is vested with full powers and duties to stop motor vehicles, issue citations for motor vehicle violations under statutory code, and make arrests with or without warrants" (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs. Leet, 585 A.2d 1033). Sheriffs and their deputies are basically police officers. Judge Carillo, who presided over this case, even went as far as writing how "instinctively,..., we are reminded of Sherwood Forest, where the Sheriff of Nottingham was the chief law enforcement officer who possessed far-reaching powers" and "King Henry of England states to the Sheriff of Nottingham,...But look well to it, Master Sheriff, for I will have my laws obeyed by all men within my kingdom, and if thou art not able to enforce them, thou art no sheriff for me."
For many years it has been known that modern sheriffs are vested with the powers and duties possessed by their predecessors under common law. In 1941, a landmark graduate student dissertation was written by an A. Anderson and stated "While the legislature may impose additional duties upon the sheriff, where he is recognized as a constitutional officer, it cannot restrict or reduce his powers as allowed by the Constitution, or where they were recognized when the constitution was adopted." Anderson continued on to say, "The legislature may vary the duties of a constitutional office, but it may not change the duties so as to destroy the power to perform the duties of the office."
Anderson found that it was legally acceptable for state legislatures to impose upon sheriffs new duties growing out of public policy or convenience. However, the state legislatures still can not strip the sheriffs of their "time honored and common law functions". The legislatures cannot "devolve them upon the incumbents of other offices created by legislative authority." From this, today’s sheriffs have both expressed constitutional and statutory grants of authority. They also have implied authority based on their predecessors actions and can utilize it when it will aid their expressed authority.
The modern sheriffs’ provinces and scope of authority can be determined by studying the modern day legislation. The sheriff has the right and duty to enforce any of this legislation as it concerns securing the peace, order, safety, and comfort of the community under his jurisdiction. In enforcing such legislation, the sheriff satisfies his constitutional obligations in enforcing the democracy’s laws, protecting the lives and property of it’s people, and safeguarding the health and morals of the community.
As the sheriffs were appointed in the New World, they acquired the power of arrest for all offenses attempted or committed in their presence, without a warrant. Any felony committed not in their presence could also be reasonable grounds for an arrest under the ancient common law, matching the exact measure for an arrest by any police officer today with one modern day addition - articulable facts leading a reasonable police officer to believe there exists probable cause that the crime did, is, or will occur.
In conclusion, modern sheriff duties are performed by order of the people instead of by order of the King or Queen, so it is easy to see how the legal authority is politically oriented. Sheriffs can maneuver through court battles involving a challenge to their authority and come out successfully when they address the legal protections of their office concerning their constitutional obligations, and no legal system or authority in the United States can challenge it with any standing. As so, the sheriff and his deputies have retained their authority to arrest without a warrant for all crimes, however defined, committed in their presence, and for felonies not committed in their presence. These powers could not be truncated when the American legal system changed from common law to statutory law due to the verbiage of the Constitution, so the Sheriff exists as both an ancient and a modern authority.
The police chief is usually appointed by their marxist mayor and is just a low level leftist politician quisling himself.
Alaskapopo
02-28-13, 20:05
The police chief is usually appointed by their marxist mayor and is just a low level leftist politician quisling himself.
Police chiefs are generally hired like any other employee which should be based off previous experience and work performance. Unfortunately politics does play a role.
However with a Sherriff its all politics because he is directly elected by the people. There are Sherrifs who have had no law enforcement experience before being hired on. Its a popularity contest. So basically if the people in your area are inclined to elect a "marxist mayor" as you said they will probably elect a marxist sherrif as well. Politicians are a product of those who elected them.
Pat
Police chiefs are generally hired like any other employee which should be based off previous experience and work performance. Unfortunately politics plays a HUGE role role.
However with a Sherriff its all politics because he is directly elected by the people. There are Sherrifs who have had no law enforcement experience before being hired on. Its a popularity contest. So basically if the people in your area are inclined to elect a "marxist mayor" as you said they will probably elect a marxist sherrif as well. Politicians are a product of those who elected them.
Pat
FIFY.
I'll also throw this in. The sheriff's office I worked for previous to my current one actually shut down an entire police dept. As in stripping them of all legal law enforcement authority within the county, seized their vehicles and equipment, locked them out, the whole shebang. It was upheld in court no less. Also consider Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Love him or hate him, had he been a mere police chief he'd have been out of business long ago. As a sheriff, not so much. You'd better have a slam dunk case to depose a sitting sheriff or it's going to be an uphill battle.
In my county we have Sheriff - elected and Police Chief - Promoted.
The Sheriff's Dept runs the jail. ..and I think they control the court as well.
The Police Dept is a whole different unit. I don't think I have ever seen a Sheriff's car with someone detained for anything. Either traffic or otherwise.
Police round 'em up.
Sheriff locks 'em up.
Raven Armament
02-28-13, 23:07
Sheriff's main job is to operate and oversee the county jail. A municipal police chief cannot. That's the sheriff's job. They also assign deputies to serve as court security and prisoner handling for court and for sentencing. Patrol deputies is a fairly modern thing. Historically, it used to be the sheriff and whatever staff (deputies) he needed to run the county jail.
Sheriff's main job is to operate and oversee the county jail. A municipal police chief cannot. That's the sheriff's job. They also assign deputies to serve as court security and prisoner handling for court and for sentencing. Patrol deputies is a fairly modern thing. Historically, it used to be the sheriff and whatever staff (deputies) he needed to run the county jail.
Perhaps in MI, but in Oklahoma the primary purpose has always been to keep the peace. My SO has a long history of fighting crime on the streets.
Raven Armament
03-01-13, 00:28
Right. Early 19th century that wasn't the case. Like I said, fairly modern for sheriff deputies to patrol and "keep the peace".
CarlosDJackal
03-01-13, 14:07
Sheriff's main job is to operate and oversee the county jail. A municipal police chief cannot. That's the sheriff's job. They also assign deputies to serve as court security and prisoner handling for court and for sentencing. Patrol deputies is a fairly modern thing. Historically, it used to be the sheriff and whatever staff (deputies) he needed to run the county jail.
This depends on your jurisdiction. In certain areas, Sheriffs existed long before any "Police Departments" were even considered.
PdxMotoxer
03-01-13, 18:48
The original role of the Sheriff was as the officer of the court. Warrants are issued and it's the job of the Sheriff and his deputies to serve those warrants. The Sheriff is the HIGHEST LEO in a State, at least in Indiana it's this way. Only the coroner has arrest powers over a sheriff(this is to keep politics or corruption in a city or state LEA from removing said Sheriff). Federal Agencies must abide by what the sheriff in said county dictates.
Here in Indiana many of the duties of what Sheriff Departments do now outside of serving warrants and other duties of the court system, the State Police were supposed to do. ISP was originally to do all county road and highway patrolling and answer calls. Sheriff Dept's were meant to serve the courts and nothing more.
Same here in Oregon
Police Chiefs the Mayor chooses and they are city only.
Sheriff is County and voted by we the people into office.
There is only ONE Sheriff per county the rest are Sheriff's deputies.
And the reason i quoted jwfuhrman is because it's the same here with now the sherrif's office seems to do most of the STATE POLICE's work as they have cut our oregon state police down to just a small handful of officers.
Police chiefs are generally hired like any other employee which should be based off previous experience and work performance. Unfortunately politics does play a role.
However with a Sherriff its all politics because he is directly elected by the people. There are Sherrifs who have had no law enforcement experience before being hired on. Its a popularity contest. So basically if the people in your area are inclined to elect a "marxist mayor" as you said they will probably elect a marxist sherrif as well. Politicians are a product of those who elected them.
Pat
Except the police chief is untouchable and can't be vetted before he is appointed and we can't get rid of him.
A perfect example of this the former police chief of Lincoln, NE now public safety administrator (another worthless six figure job paid for by the taxpayer) who is a liberal anti gun shitbag and will not let anyone sign off on NFA paperwork. He has had this power for nearly 30 years.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 12:39
Except the police chief is untouchable and can't be vetted before he is appointed and we can't get rid of him.
A perfect example of this the former police chief of Lincoln, NE now public safety administrator (another worthless six figure job paid for by the taxpayer) who is a liberal anti gun shitbag and will not let anyone sign off on NFA paperwork. He has had this power for nearly 30 years.
Police Chiefs are at will positions and they can be forced out by putting pressure on the mayor and its actually easier than removing a sitting sherrif.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.