Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Police Conduct topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

POST revokes Orange County deputy’s certification after DUI, driving on suspended license and unsecured firearm findings

6438450 · September 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission voted to adopt the advisory board and Division recommendation to revoke Deputy Jared Nathaniel Bertane's POST certification after finding repeated dishonesty in internal interviews, multiple instances of driving on a suspended license and leaving a loaded handgun unsecured in a loaner vehicle.

The Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training on Sept. 10 voted to revoke the POST certification of Deputy Jared Nathaniel Bertane of the Orange County Sheriff’s Department after the Division presented evidence it said met the clear-and-convincing standard for serious misconduct.

Paul Nanfito, a law enforcement consultant with POST’s Professional Conduct Southern Bureau, and attorney Carrie Wooling presented the Division’s investigative summary. The Division said its review covered four administrative interviews across 17 months and that Bertane repeatedly provided false or misleading answers about whether he was driving while his license was suspended following a June 1, 2022 DUI arrest (he later pled guilty to two misdemeanors). The Division presented DMV suspension documents and body‑worn‑camera (BWC) footage and said those materials showed Bertane drove a department patrol vehicle on multiple dates while his license was suspended and that records contradicted his repeated claims that a trainee or coworker had driven during the suspension period. The Division also presented evidence that Bertane left a loaded Glock in a loaner pickup truck rented by the sheriff’s deputy and that another citizen drove that vehicle unknowingly for two weeks with a loaded firearm inside.

‘‘The respondent was untruthful during four administrative interviews and left an unsecured, loaded firearm in a rental vehicle used by the public,’’ Nanfito told commissioners. ‘‘This was repeated dishonesty and multiple acts that violate the law, including driving on a suspended license while on duty.’’ The Division recommended revocation.

Deputy Bertane’s counsel, Kylie Coleman of Frown Law Group, told the commission her client accepts responsibility for the misconduct but asked the commission not to decertify him permanently. Coleman described the dual‑track nature of DUI proceedings — criminal court and separate DMV administrative actions — and said overlapping administrative timelines created confusion about suspension dates. She said Bertane engaged in treatment, completed court‑ordered programs, has been rehabilitated, returned to patrol work and accepted supervisory discipline and a last‑chance employment agreement; she asked the commission to consider suspension with conditions rather than permanent decertification.

Commissioners heard public comment from community members. Yousef Miller of North County Equity and Justice Coalition said the passage of time and the subsequent rehabilitation gave him pause about permanent decertification and that he supported rehabilitation in this instance; Leticia Williamson urged strict accountability and recommended decertification.

After returning from closed session, the commission moved to support the advisory board’s recommendation to revoke certification. On a roll call, 12 commissioners voted to revoke and one commissioner voted no; the motion carried and met the two‑thirds threshold required for revocation.

Why this matters: The case raises questions about officer candor during administrative inquiries, the interplay of DMV and criminal processes after DUI arrests, and firearm‑storage practices. POST applied the ‘‘clear and convincing’’ standard for administrative discipline and determined the Division’s record supported revocation.

What’s next: The revocation will be reflected in POST records and may be subject to administrative appeals or further legal proceedings.