close
close

Sarasota deputy Matthew Ackley fired following misleading testimony

The Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office has fired a deputy for giving misleading testimony that a judge nearly equated to fraud on the court, sending a ripple effect that’s impacted nearly 80 other criminal cases.

After testimony from the 17-year law enforcement veteran during a DUI case was found to be misleading, the former deputy acknowledged he’d been unprepared for court and said there’d been a moment of miscommunication but alleges SCSO ensured he “was guilty of multiple policy violations, guaranteeing my dismissal.”

Former deputy Matthew Ackley was fired from the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office in June after a Sarasota judge found he had given false or misleading testimony during a DUI case. A subsequent internal affairs investigation found Ackley violated the department’s policies of conduct, created doubt regarding honesty, conduct unbecoming and neglect of job duties. 

Ackley was the investigating deputy for an April 2023 crash involving two cars in Englewood where a 59-year-old man was arrested and charged with DUI, and two counts of DUI damage to property or person. 

In case you missed it: Sarasota County Commission puts Sheriff eviction-prevention program funding in jeopardy

More: Sarasota County deputy cruiser collides with cyclist

During the investigation, Ackley noted in a probable cause affidavit that taking a breath test while in the hospital “was not practical and would not be completed in a reasonable amount of time.” Ackley explained later in court that every time he tried to use an Intoxilyzer near a hospital, he would get radio interference or a RFI notification, rendering the breath test null and void. 

It was later proven that Ackley’s testimony had been false. 

Ackley appealed his termination before a board made of five of his former colleagues. His attorney, Bradley Tobin, said his client suffers from anxiety when it comes to testifying in court, causing the former deputy to freeze up, get brain fog, and make overbroad statements.

Ackley, in a statement to the Herald-Tribune, said he accepted responsibility for not adequately preparing for the court case basing his testimony from memory, but added that SCSO violated the Officer Bill of Rights during the investigation.

“The Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office elected to dismiss me by compiling multiple violations against me,” Ackley said. “In their investigation, they violated the Officer Bill of Rights, gaining testimony by withholding evidence, refusing to follow up on additional evidence I brought forth, and other violations the Sheriff’s Office testified to but refused to investigate.”

SCSO spokesman Evan Keats stated in an emailed response that deputies have ample opportunities to attend training and programs related to courtroom testimony, in addition to the training they receive at the academy. Keats said one example of training offered to traffic deputies is the Basic DUI Trial Preparation course instructed by the Florida Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor Program.

“The credibility of any testifying witness, including a law enforcement officer, is always relevant in any type of court proceeding,” Keats said. “While every position at SCSO has the possibility of needing to testify under oath, the DUI/Traffic Unit members have arguably the highest probability of testifying in administrative, civil, and criminal hearings on a regular basis.”

Keats added department officials believe the issue in Ackley’s case wasn’t a lack of training with testifying in court, but rather “a lack of preparedness, lack of proactivity, and a reckless disregard for the truth.”

Asking for an appeal: What led to the former SCSO deputy’s dismissal

On an overcast Friday morning, less than a month after he was dismissed from the job, Ackley entered the headquarters of the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office off Cattleridge Boulevard. 

Accompanied by his attorney, the former deputy took a seat before the Career Service Board. The purpose of the hearing on June 28 was to ask the board to repeal Ackley’s dismissal.

Assistant General Counsel Marlo Sloan, representing SCSO, said in her opening statements the board would not reinvestigate the allegations against Ackley, but determine if his conduct rose to the level of termination.

Sloan walked the board through the timeline of events in the DUI case. Ackley had been the lead investigator following a crash on April 28, 2023, involving two cars on Englewood Road and Englewood Isles Parkway where the defendant was arrested and charged with DUI, and two counts of DUI property damage.  

When Ackley spoke with the driver, he observed that his speech was slow and slurred, his eyes were red and watery, and he could detect the smell of alcohol, according to the probable cause affidavit. The driver turned down performing a field sobriety exercise at the hospital and declined a blood sample under implied consent.

Ackley noted in the probable cause affidavit that with defendants in the hospital, “a breath test was not practical” and couldn’t be completed in a reasonable amount of time. 

During an initial hearing for a motion to suppress before Judge Maryann Uzabel, Ackley testified that every time he used breath test equipment near a hospital, he would receive radio interference, according to court records. He added he received these at Sarasota Memorial Hospital in Venice and Sarasota. 

When Ackley testified about receiving radio interference every time he used a breathalyzer near a hospital, the defendant’s defense attorney was perplexed. 

A former prosecutor in Tampa for four years, Robert Harrison has been a defense attorney since 1990 and specializes in DUI cases. Harrison told the board he is a frequent lecturer for the Florida Bar and other organizations about breathalyzers and breath tests. 

After hearing Ackley’s remarks in court, Harrison enlisted the help of his son to dig deeper. The two went to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement’s website where agencies submit all breath tests that are performed and downloaded all the tests which listed Ackley as the investigator. 

Harrison’s son analyzed the report and found that Ackley had only three cases where he received an RFI notification during a DUI investigation. 

None of them were near a hospital. 

Harrison told the board he’d wanted to confirm with the sheriff’s records before presenting the evidence before the judge to ensure there weren’t any breath tests missing from his report. He scheduled a deposition hearing for Ackley and sent the deputy a subpoena to bring with him any breath test affidavits where there was radio interference noted. 

The deposition day arrived, and Ackley didn’t show, according to Harrison and the prosecutor on the case. At the rescheduled hearing, Ackley came empty-handed despite the prosecutor on the case saying he could be in trouble if he did so. He later tried to justify his actions, telling an internal affairs investigator that he didn’t view asking someone to get the documents for him as having access to the reports, according to the report.

Sarasota court news: Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital files appeal in Sarasota ‘Take Care of Maya’ case

In case you missed it: Appeal filed in Ziegler case 5 days after Sarasota officials decline to pursue one

Ackley told the Herald-Tribune he’d contacted an agency inspector and prosecutor for help with the documents because they had more experience.

The judge granted Harrison’s motion to set aside a previous order denying a motion to suppress and found that Ackley’s prior testimony “was very misleading and constituted a fraud on the court.” 

Tobin argued that he believed his client was denied due process during the internal affairs investigation. Tobin explained to the board that Ackley, who had prior law enforcement and military experience, suffers anxiety when testifying in court which causes him to freeze up and make overbroad statements at times.

While Judge Uzabel initially gave a ruling that Ackley had committed fraud on the court, she later walked back the statement after the prosecutor on the case rehabilitated Ackley’s credibility. 

“However, his testimony is misleading with various inconsistencies which almost rise to that level,” her order states. 

This came after personnel from SCSO attempted to search through their records to find reports to support what Ackley had testified in court.

Harrison said that the sheriff’s office was able to find one arrest Ackley made where he had received an error at Sarasota Memorial Hospital. Harrison added that the way the case had been uploaded to FDLE caused it to not show up when he and his son went looking through the reports, which is why he’d submitted the subpoena.

However, Ackley’s testimony about receiving an error at the Venice hospital never happened, it “was a complete fabrication,” Harrison said.

Ackley told the judge at that hearing he hadn’t prepared for the prior hearings and his testimony had been solely from memory, according to court documents. The prosecutor also introduced a video from a different DUI case that was found while SCSO searched its records which showed a breath test being conducted by another deputy at Sarasota Memorial Hospital where there wasn’t an error. Ackley admitted he’d been present for that breath test. 

While presenting her case before the board, Sloan called on Sgt. Charles Flint, who was Ackley’s former supervisor from November 2020 to January 2023. 

Flint stated he didn’t recall having conversations with Ackley about his anxiety testifying in court, adding he would have remembered having such a conversation because Ackley stood out as being very confident with DUI cases. 

An internal affairs report obtained by the Herald-Tribune stated that Flint had noted that in November 2021 Ackley had taken a DUI trial prep course. However, another of Ackley’s supervisors told investigators he never spoke with Ackley about having issues with testifying in court. 

“He further stated he would remember it as testifying is one of a DUI deputy’s biggest functions, and he would have gotten Deputy Ackley more training if needed,” the report states. 

The supervisor added he hadn’t received any complaints from either prosecutors or defense attorneys about Ackley’s testimony. 

Ackley claims that when Flint called him minutes before his rescheduled deposition date, the two spoke about “testimony advice and about the anxiety he knew I had when going to court.” He added he’d told an investigator during the internal affairs investigation and brought up the violations to the sheriff’s legal counsel.

However, the legal counsel found that he hadn’t notified an investigator of the alleged intentional violation or requested that his superiors be notified, and when he did, the request was filed outside the three-day window, according to Ackley.

Flint told the board he wholeheartedly believed Ackley’s actions “tarnished the DUI unit’s reputation” that Flint worked so hard to build up. 

The board ruled to not overturn the dismissal in a unanimous vote, according to a final order. 

Following the judge’s order and Ackley’s subsequent termination from the sheriff’s office on June 4, 2024, the State Attorney’s Office created a list of all the cases Ackley was involved in, according to an email by Assistant State Attorney Andrew van Sickle and forwarded to the Herald-Tribune by another attorney.

The email includes a spreadsheet with 80 other cases where Ackley was a witness and the State Attorney’s Office would need to submit Brady notices.

A Brady notice, or Brady disclosure, was established in the landmark 1963 case, Brady v. Maryland, which states that the State is obligated to turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defense, said local Sarasota defense attorney Elizabeth Loeffler, the president of the Sarasota Chapter of Florida Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys. Exculpatory evidence is any evidence that could help the defense with their case.

For Harrison’s client, the judge’s finding that Ackley had misled the court resulted in a lighter sentence. The client pleaded guilty to reckless driving with alcohol and was sentenced to 12 months of probation, a $500 fine, court costs, DUI school, and 50 hours of public service, according to court records.

Former Sarasota County deputy responds to termination, board’s vote

Ackley, who worked for SCSO since December 2019, said that a moment of miscommunication happened during his testimony, and although he spoke the truth, he hadn’t spoken with clarity which is a mistake he regrets.

“In the Assistant State Attorney’s own words, I sounded in-artful when I spoke the truth, and the judge overseeing the case agreed that my testimony was not fraudulent,” Ackley said. “However, the Sheriff’s Office ensured I was guilty of multiple policy violations, guaranteeing my dismissal instead of seeking the truth.”

The former deputy alleges that SCSO violated several sections of the Officer Bill of Rights during the investigation. Some of the alleged violations included not providing him the opportunity to access his agency computer or phone to review evidence related to his testimony before questioning him and then using his statements against him; having two interrogators question him; not informing him before being questioned the nature of the complaint; and not informing him who had filed the complaint.

Ashley Benefield Verdict: Jury makes decision in ballerina case

More: Ballerina Ashley Benefield trial concludes with guilty verdict. What are the next steps?

Ackley said that when he was first questioned on May 10 by a sergeant and lieutenant during an internal affairs investigation, he had asked to access his agency computer and phone to review emails related to his testimony. He alleges the sergeant refused to grant him access and questioned Ackley about the emails, later using his statements as evidence that Ackley was misleading and violating the department’s policy of conduct which creates doubt regarding honesty.

“This evidence is a right outlined by the state to provide officers with adequate preparation to both refute the charges brought against them and to prevent officers from perjuring themselves during an internal affairs investigation,” Ackley stated.

Ackley also claims that during both interviews with internal affairs, he was interviewed by two investigators, violating Florida law that officers should only be interviewed by one investigator unless they waive that right.

Additionally, the investigators began recording the interviews without informing him who the complainant was during the first interview and allegedly questioned him for approximately 20 minutes while “off-record” during the second interview. Under Florida law, Ackley states interviews should be recorded so transcripts can be produced.

Before the second interview, Ackley mentioned that the Officer Bill of Rights states he must be informed who filed the complaint, at which point, the sergeant informed him the complainant was the judge in the case, as well as the legal counsel and state attorney, who were added later. However, Ackley states he didn’t receive any documentation.

Ackley also claims that the agency initially investigated him for “untruthfulness in an official proceeding,” but when the judge decided he hadn’t committed fraud on the court, they did not exonerate him for that complaint. Instead, Ackley said investigators wiped the complaint from records and added the violation of conduct which creates doubt regarding honesty.

“I thank the community for the opportunity to serve in the capacity I did and wish nothing but the best for the citizens of Sarasota County,” Ackley said. “I am proud of my 17 years of military and law enforcement service and look forward to new opportunities to serve.”

Gabriela Szymanowska covers the legal system for the Herald-Tribune in partnership with Report for America. You can support her work with a tax-deductible donation to Report for America. Contact Gabriela Szymanowska at [email protected], or on X: @GabrielaSzyman3.

You may also like...