Update:
On March 7, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona issued General Order 25-05 📜, officially superseding General Order 19-14. This newly revised order delivers critical clarification regarding how federal law enforcement officers are to handle citations, arrests 🚓, and the required judicial procedures — specifically in relation to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure ⚖️.
Read here:
What's the Difference Between 19-14 and 25-05?
Under General Order 19-14, federal officers were allowed to issue U.S. District Court Violation Notices (USDCVNs) in lieu of arrest for petty offenses and certain misdemeanors. However, the language in 19-14 was ambiguous and opened the door for misuse. It stated that citations could be issued when an individual was "arrested and charged," yet failed to clearly define whether custodial detention or transport to a holding cell constituted an "arrest" under Rule 5 🚨.
This vague phrasing led to years of misuse — particularly by Phoenix VA Police — who often:
- Physically arrest individuals 🚔,
- Transport them to the office 🏢,
- Detain them in back rooms or holding cells 🚪,
- Conduct full searches of personal property (bags, purses, wallets, etc.) 🎒,
- Issue citations 🧾, and
- Release them without bringing them before a magistrate judge 👨⚖️.
These were not mere detentions or field citations — they were actual custodial arrests misrepresented as citations. Under Rule 5, these individuals were entitled to prompt presentment before a judge. Instead, that constitutional right was bypassed ❌.
Note: This might sound convenient to someone who believes they "got off easy" with a citation — but what if you were wrongly arrested? Your opportunity to stand before a judge 🧑⚖️ and place the facts on the record is stripped away. That moment — where you could have exposed rights violations, officer misconduct, or even physical injury — is now delayed or erased by an administrative citation process. Evidence may be lost, witnesses may disappear, and injuries may go undocumented. Worse, if the arresting officer had credibility issues, you are denied the right to challenge that through immediate judicial review. A citation doesn’t undo an unlawful arrest — it just buries it deeper ⚠️.
Knowles v. Iowa – Why It Matters
The Supreme Court’s decision in Knowles v. Iowa, 525 U.S. 113 (1998) ⚖️ further supports this position. In that case, the Court ruled that issuing a citation during a traffic stop does not give officers the authority to conduct a full search, as there is no arrest. Applying that logic here, VA Police conducting full property searches, detaining individuals in holding areas, and then issuing citations — without judicial presentment — violated clearly established Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections 🛑.
Misunderstanding of Rule 58
Phoenix VA Police leaders and management have been misreading Rule 58 📘 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, treating it as a green light to perform what they assume is a quick “cite‑and‑release.” In reality, Rule 58 only prescribes magistrate‑court procedures for petty offenses and misdemeanors—procedures that presume a lawful, non‑custodial citation. It confers zero authority to arrest, search, or detain; once an officer places someone in custody, they have executed a full arrest that immediately triggers Rule 5’s presentment requirements before a magistrate judge ⚠️.
Willful Disregard of VA Directive/Handbook 0730
VA Directive/Handbook 0730 📕 authorizes only two lawful paths: (1) issue a citation and release the person on the spot, or (2) make a custodial arrest and present the arrestee promptly to a magistrate judge 👨⚖️. It grants no authority to arrest someone, transport them to the station, detain them in a holding cell, conduct searches of thier property, and then hand them a citation before release—i.e., a custodial arrest masquerading as a “cite‑and‑release” without any judicial review.
Example of Misconduct: The 2024 Phoenix VA Incident
An examples of these issues in practice can be found here:
What General Order 25-05 Changed:
General Order 25-05 corrects this by clearly stating that when a person is arrested — or subjected to actions that functionally constitute an arrest — that individual must be taken "without unnecessary delay before a magistrate judge," in accordance with Rule 5 ⚖️.
Why It Matters:
This change came only after extensive public pressure 📢, whistleblower disclosures 🕵️, and constitutional challenges 🧑⚖️ by veterans and legal advocates who documented repeated due process violations by Phoenix VA Police. For years, the government ignored these violations, even as officers used procedural loopholes to arrest, detain, search, and cite individuals without legal authority or judicial review.
General Order 25-05 is not just a procedural update — it's a quiet admission that the prior framework enabled constitutional violations 🧨.
What Now?
Changing policy is only the first step. We now call for:
Oversight by DOJ, OAWP, and OIG 🔍,
Review of past cases handled under the ambiguous 19-14 policy 📂,
Immediate enforcement of Rule 5 protections across all VA Police departments ⚖️.
👉 If you or someone you know has been arrested in this manner, we urge you to contact the VA Office of Security and Law Enforcement (OS&LE) at osle@va.gov 📧 and ask why Phoenix Veterans Affairs Police officials continues to allow these unlawful practices.
This isn’t about paperwork 🗂️. It’s about rights ✊. It’s about accountability ⚖️. It’s about veterans.
#Rule5 #DueProcessViolation #VApoliceMisconduct #GeneralOrder2505 #VAWhistleblower #VeteranRights #FourthAmendment #FifthAmendment #ConstitutionalCrisis #IllegalSearch #UnlawfulArrest #CarlTHaydenVAMC #PhoenixVAHospital #PhoenixVAHCS #PhoenixVAHealthcareSystem #PhoenixVeteransHospital #PhoenixVAPolice #PhoenixVeteransAffairsPolice #38CFR1218 #VAHandbook0730 #MagistrateRights #CivilLiberties #JusticeReform #VApoliceAccountability #VeteransJustice #PVAHCS