TCOLE accepts multiple suspensions and revocations, maintains suspension for police chief indicted on felony theft

At its February meeting the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement acted on a slate of disciplinary matters and interim summary-suspension cases.

Assistant General Counsel Mark Duncan presented default suspension recommendations for licensees who did not respond to notices (cases included alleged DWIs and false reporting). The commission voted to accept the default suspension orders and later accepted default revocation orders for two respondents placed on community supervision for family-violence assault.

Assistant General Counsel Daniel Walker presented agreed waivers and administrative-penalty agreements, including an agreed 14-day suspension for Aurelio Garza and a $2,500 administrative-penalty waiver accepted from Brooks County Sheriff’s Office for appointing an ineligible individual. The commission also accepted an agreed order suspending Dolores Gilbert (Talti Police Department) for a four-month suspension followed by an eight-month probated suspension.

The commission then considered a summary-suspension recommendation for Johnny Sean Newsom, chief of the Buckholtz Police Department, who had been indicted on a felony theft-by-a-public-servant charge relating to alleged improper municipal purchases. Staff said the pending felony indictment constituted an immediate peril to public health, safety or welfare and recommended continued suspension pending criminal proceedings. Attorney CJ Grisham, representing Newsom, argued the charges were politically motivated and asked the commission not to suspend. The State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) proposed a finding supporting continued suspension pending the criminal case; the commission voted to accept the PFD and to keep Newsom’s license suspended while the criminal matter proceeds.

Commissioners emphasized consistency with prior practice when the commission considered suspension after a grand-jury indictment, while some commissioners questioned whether certain mitigating factors should alter the appropriate sanction in individual cases. The meeting included two public-comment speakers (Newsom and his attorney) who challenged staff’s characterization and the investigative process.

Staff said other contested matters will return in April for hearings as needed.