July 10, 2025
Temporary suspension of APD Officer John Carrasco
Chief of Police Lisa Davis determined that Officer John Carrasco's actions violated Civil Service Commission Rule 10.03 and suspended him for three days, from July 19, 2025, to July 21, 2025. An Internal Affairs investigation revealed that Officer Gilbertson violated Civil Service Rules and APD policy during an incident in which he was arrested by the Fredericksburg Police Department for public intoxication.
Document
Temporary suspension of APD Officer John Carrasco144.52 KBPDF Content
Disclaimer: The following text was extracted from the PDF file to make this document more accessible. This machine-generated content may contain styling errors due to redactions. In some instances, text may not load if the original file is a scanned image or has not been made searchable. For the full version of the document, please view the PDF.OF CUSTIN
FOUNDED
6181
MEMORANDUM
RCVD: HRD, OFFIC
2025 JUL 18 PM4:38
Austin Police Department
Office of the Chief of Police
TO:
Susan Sinz, Director of Civil Service
FROM:
Lisa Davis, Chief of Police
DATE:
July 18, 2025
SUBJECT: Temporary Suspension of Police Officer John Carrasco #6626
Internal Affairs Control Number 2024-1269
Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code, Section
143.052, and Rule 10, Rules of Procedure for the Firefighters', Police Officers' and
Emergency Medical Service Personnel's Civil Service Commission, [ have temporarily
suspended Police Officer John Carrasco #6626 from duty as a City of Austin, Texas police
officer for a period of three (3) days. The temporary suspension is effective beginning on
July 19, 2025, and continuing through July 21, 2025.
I took this action because Officer Carrasco violated Civil Service Commission Rule 10.03,
which sets forth the grounds for disciplinary suspensions of employees in the classified
service, and states:
No employce of the classified service of the City of Austin shall engage in,
or be involved in, any of the following acts or conduct, and the same shall
constitute cause for suspension of an employee from the classified service
of the City:
L.
Violation of any of the rules and regulations of the Fire
Department or Police Department or of special orders, as
applicable.
The following are the specific acts committed by Ofc. Carrasco in violation of Rule 10:
On December 23, 2024, Ofc. John Carrasco was in an off-duty capacity when he traveled
to Fredericksburg, Texas for a vacation with his
It is undisputed that Ofc.
I
Carrasco consumed a large number of alcoholic beverages that day, both before and after
traveling to Fredericksburg.
In the early morning hours of December 24, 2024, Ofc. Carrasco called 9-1-1. This call
generated a police response by the Fredericksburg Police Department (FPD) and the
Gillespie County Sheriff's Office (GCSO). FPD and GCSO contacted Ofc. Carrasco and
his
on foot in the 100 block of Burbank Street. During their dialogue with
officers, Ofc. Carrasco was unable to direct officers to where they were lodging in
Fredericksburg. Based upon their training and experience, and what they observed during
their interactions with Ofc. Carrasco and his
officer(s) concluded that Ofc.
Carrasco and his
were intoxicated and a danger to themselves. Therefore, they
placed them both under arrest for Public Intoxication-Class C misdemeanor.
An FPD Corporal completed an Affidavit of Probable Cause for Ofc. Carrasco's Arrest
for a violation for Public Intoxication (PI), Texas Penal Code § 49.02, where he
documented:
"Based on John's personal appearance, demeanor, detecting the odor of an
alcoholic beverage emitting from his breath/person, his slurred speech, receiving
the 911 call, and not knowing where his Air B&B was located; I determined that
he lacked the normal use of his mental and physical faculties by reason of the
introduction of alcohol into his body to the degree he was a danger to himself or
another. I have seen intoxicated and impaired people on many occasions in the
past and have no doubt that John was as well. If not arrested, and if John was
released from the call, he could have attempted to walk to where he was staying
for the night (which he did not provide me with an address) and fall into the
roadway potentially getting struck by a vehicle."
On December 26, 2024, Ofc. Carrasco's Commander, submitted an Internal Complaint
Memorandum to Internal Affairs (IA), requesting an investigation into the events of
December 23-24, 2024.
At the onset of the IA investigation, Ofc. Carrasco acknowledged that he had consumed a
significant number of aleoholic beverages at various locations on December 23, 2024, and
into the early morning hours of December 24, 2024. He started drinking before he traveled
to Fredericksburg and continued after he and his
arrived. Ofc. Carrasco stated he
had no memory of certain facts, including but not limited to calling 9-1-1. He stated he and
his
rode in a vehicle with two women, whom they had just met at one of the last
establishments where they consumed alcohol. Ofc. Carrasco stated in hindsight riding with
these women was not the safest decision. Ofc. Carrasco also went on to say the driver of
the vehicle drove them in an erratic fashion, including going through at least one red light,
drove at a high rate of speed, and in the opposite direction of their intended destination.
This apparently prompted him to ask to be dropped off before calling 9-1-1.
Body wom camera footage from FPD showed that after calling 9-1-1 and when first
approached by officers, Ofc. Carrasco was asked where he was coming from. Instead of
answering the question, Ofc. Carrasco stated he was "off-duty" and then confirmed he
was an off-duty police officer. Throughout the field investigation, Ofc. Carrasco
2
continued to repeat that he was an Officer with the Austin Police Department (APD) and
mentioned his previous military service.
On February 18-20, 2025, Ofc. Carrasco, his attorney, and Fredericksburg Municipal
Court Judge S. Becker signed documentation, including an ORDER OF DEFERRED
DISPOSITION (Cause No:242380), which stated Ofc. Carrasco entered a plea of "No
Contest to the offense of Public Intoxication.' The court order then stated that
"Defendant was found guilty by the court. The February 20, 2025, court order then
stated, "if the Defendant complies with the condition of this Order, then this cause shall
be DISMISSED by the court and not reported as a conviction." Ofc. Carrasco
subsequently completed those conditions in May of 2025.
Ultimately in his March 5, 2025, IA interview Ofc. Carrasco acknowledged that his
conduct during this incident could cause embarrassment to the department or city, and
further stated, "It could cause embarrassment because of all the things that we represent,
represent of office, represent being honest, represent being a member of the Police
Department, member of the Hostage Negotiation Team, member of the Lake Patrol Unit.
You know, the - personally, as a member of the armed services, like, 28 years, like, I
represent being a Master Chief in the Navy. I represent being a father. I represent a lot of
those things. And so absolutely, I can understand how being arrested would be an
embarrassment."
In addition to his conduct in this case, the Chain of Command and I (Chief Lisa Davis)
gave weight to the fact that Ofc. Carrasco acknowledged in the Disciplinary Meeting that
he was intoxicated on the date of the incident. I also gave considerable weight to Ofc.
Carrasco's lengthy service record with APD, with no disciplinary history, in reaching my
final disciplinary decision.
By these actions, Ofc. Carrasco violated Rule 10.03(L) of the Civil Service Rules by
violating the following rules and regulations of the Austin Police Department:
Austin Police Department Policy 900.1.1: General Conduct and
Responsibilities: Responsibility to Know and Comply
900.1.1 Responsibility to Know and Comply
The rules of conduct set forth in this order do not serve as an all-inclusive list of
requirements, limitations, or prohibitions on employee conduct and activities;
employees are required to know and comply with all Department policies,
procedures, and written directives.
(a)
Employees will maintain a working knowledge and comply with the
laws, ordinances, statutes, regulations, and APD written directives
which pertain to their assigned duties.
(b)
Employees who do not understand their assigned duties or
responsibilities will read the relevant directives and guidelines, and
3
will consult their immediate supervisor for clarification and
explanation.
(c)
A lack of knowledge of an APD written directive is not a defense to
disciplinary action.
To Wit:
Texas Penal Code Section 49.02: Public Intoxication
(a)
A person commits an offense if the person appears in a public place
while intoxicated to the degree that the person may endanger the
person or another.
(c)
Except as provided by Subsection (e), an offense under this section
is a Class C misdemeanor.
Austin Police Department Policy 900.3.2(a): General Conduct and
Responsibilities: Acts Bringing Discredit Upon the Department
900.3.2(a) Acts Bringing Discredit Upon the Department
Since the conduct of personnel both on-duty or off-duty may reflect directly upon
the Department, employees must conduct themselves at all times in a manner which
does not bring reproach, discredit, or embarrassment to the Department or to the
City.
(a)
Employees will not commit any act which tends to destroy public
confidence in, and respect for, the Department or which is
prejudicial to the good order, efficiency, or discipline of the
Department.
By copy of this memo, Ofc. Carrasco is hereby advised of this temporary suspension and
that the suspension may be appealed to the Civil Service Commission by filing with the
Director of Civil Service, within ten (10) daysafter receipt of a copy of this memo, a proper
notice of appeal in accordance with Section 143.010 of the Texas Local Government Code.
By copy of this memo and as required by Section 143.057 of the Texas Local Government
Code, Ofc. Carrasco is hereby advised that such section and the Agreement Between the
City of Austin and the Austin Police Association provide for an appeal to an independent
third-party hearing examiner, in accordance with the provisions of such Agreement. If
appeal is made to a hearing examiner, all rights of appeal to a District Court are waived,
except as provided by Subsection (j) of Section 143.057 of the Texas Local Government
Code. That section states that the State District Court may hear appeals of an award of a
hearing examiner only on the grounds that the arbitration panel was without jurisdiction or
exceeded its jurisdiction, or that the order was procured by fraud, collusion or other
unlawful means. In order to appeal to a hearing examiner, the original notice of appeal
submitted to the Director of Civil Service must state that appeal is made to a hearing
examiner.
4
Chief 3961 of
7/18/2025
Police
Date
Staniszenski JASON for Chief DAYS
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I hereby acknowledge receipt of the above and foregoing memorandum of temporary
suspension and I have been advised that if I desire to appeal that I have ten (10) calendar
days from the date of this receipt to file written notice of appeal with the Director of Civil
Service in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government
Code.
Jeff Police Officer John Carrasco #6626
7/18/25
Date
5
FOUNDED
6181
MEMORANDUM
RCVD: HRD, OFFIC
2025 JUL 18 PM4:38
Austin Police Department
Office of the Chief of Police
TO:
Susan Sinz, Director of Civil Service
FROM:
Lisa Davis, Chief of Police
DATE:
July 18, 2025
SUBJECT: Temporary Suspension of Police Officer John Carrasco #6626
Internal Affairs Control Number 2024-1269
Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code, Section
143.052, and Rule 10, Rules of Procedure for the Firefighters', Police Officers' and
Emergency Medical Service Personnel's Civil Service Commission, [ have temporarily
suspended Police Officer John Carrasco #6626 from duty as a City of Austin, Texas police
officer for a period of three (3) days. The temporary suspension is effective beginning on
July 19, 2025, and continuing through July 21, 2025.
I took this action because Officer Carrasco violated Civil Service Commission Rule 10.03,
which sets forth the grounds for disciplinary suspensions of employees in the classified
service, and states:
No employce of the classified service of the City of Austin shall engage in,
or be involved in, any of the following acts or conduct, and the same shall
constitute cause for suspension of an employee from the classified service
of the City:
L.
Violation of any of the rules and regulations of the Fire
Department or Police Department or of special orders, as
applicable.
The following are the specific acts committed by Ofc. Carrasco in violation of Rule 10:
On December 23, 2024, Ofc. John Carrasco was in an off-duty capacity when he traveled
to Fredericksburg, Texas for a vacation with his
It is undisputed that Ofc.
I
Carrasco consumed a large number of alcoholic beverages that day, both before and after
traveling to Fredericksburg.
In the early morning hours of December 24, 2024, Ofc. Carrasco called 9-1-1. This call
generated a police response by the Fredericksburg Police Department (FPD) and the
Gillespie County Sheriff's Office (GCSO). FPD and GCSO contacted Ofc. Carrasco and
his
on foot in the 100 block of Burbank Street. During their dialogue with
officers, Ofc. Carrasco was unable to direct officers to where they were lodging in
Fredericksburg. Based upon their training and experience, and what they observed during
their interactions with Ofc. Carrasco and his
officer(s) concluded that Ofc.
Carrasco and his
were intoxicated and a danger to themselves. Therefore, they
placed them both under arrest for Public Intoxication-Class C misdemeanor.
An FPD Corporal completed an Affidavit of Probable Cause for Ofc. Carrasco's Arrest
for a violation for Public Intoxication (PI), Texas Penal Code § 49.02, where he
documented:
"Based on John's personal appearance, demeanor, detecting the odor of an
alcoholic beverage emitting from his breath/person, his slurred speech, receiving
the 911 call, and not knowing where his Air B&B was located; I determined that
he lacked the normal use of his mental and physical faculties by reason of the
introduction of alcohol into his body to the degree he was a danger to himself or
another. I have seen intoxicated and impaired people on many occasions in the
past and have no doubt that John was as well. If not arrested, and if John was
released from the call, he could have attempted to walk to where he was staying
for the night (which he did not provide me with an address) and fall into the
roadway potentially getting struck by a vehicle."
On December 26, 2024, Ofc. Carrasco's Commander, submitted an Internal Complaint
Memorandum to Internal Affairs (IA), requesting an investigation into the events of
December 23-24, 2024.
At the onset of the IA investigation, Ofc. Carrasco acknowledged that he had consumed a
significant number of aleoholic beverages at various locations on December 23, 2024, and
into the early morning hours of December 24, 2024. He started drinking before he traveled
to Fredericksburg and continued after he and his
arrived. Ofc. Carrasco stated he
had no memory of certain facts, including but not limited to calling 9-1-1. He stated he and
his
rode in a vehicle with two women, whom they had just met at one of the last
establishments where they consumed alcohol. Ofc. Carrasco stated in hindsight riding with
these women was not the safest decision. Ofc. Carrasco also went on to say the driver of
the vehicle drove them in an erratic fashion, including going through at least one red light,
drove at a high rate of speed, and in the opposite direction of their intended destination.
This apparently prompted him to ask to be dropped off before calling 9-1-1.
Body wom camera footage from FPD showed that after calling 9-1-1 and when first
approached by officers, Ofc. Carrasco was asked where he was coming from. Instead of
answering the question, Ofc. Carrasco stated he was "off-duty" and then confirmed he
was an off-duty police officer. Throughout the field investigation, Ofc. Carrasco
2
continued to repeat that he was an Officer with the Austin Police Department (APD) and
mentioned his previous military service.
On February 18-20, 2025, Ofc. Carrasco, his attorney, and Fredericksburg Municipal
Court Judge S. Becker signed documentation, including an ORDER OF DEFERRED
DISPOSITION (Cause No:242380), which stated Ofc. Carrasco entered a plea of "No
Contest to the offense of Public Intoxication.' The court order then stated that
"Defendant was found guilty by the court. The February 20, 2025, court order then
stated, "if the Defendant complies with the condition of this Order, then this cause shall
be DISMISSED by the court and not reported as a conviction." Ofc. Carrasco
subsequently completed those conditions in May of 2025.
Ultimately in his March 5, 2025, IA interview Ofc. Carrasco acknowledged that his
conduct during this incident could cause embarrassment to the department or city, and
further stated, "It could cause embarrassment because of all the things that we represent,
represent of office, represent being honest, represent being a member of the Police
Department, member of the Hostage Negotiation Team, member of the Lake Patrol Unit.
You know, the - personally, as a member of the armed services, like, 28 years, like, I
represent being a Master Chief in the Navy. I represent being a father. I represent a lot of
those things. And so absolutely, I can understand how being arrested would be an
embarrassment."
In addition to his conduct in this case, the Chain of Command and I (Chief Lisa Davis)
gave weight to the fact that Ofc. Carrasco acknowledged in the Disciplinary Meeting that
he was intoxicated on the date of the incident. I also gave considerable weight to Ofc.
Carrasco's lengthy service record with APD, with no disciplinary history, in reaching my
final disciplinary decision.
By these actions, Ofc. Carrasco violated Rule 10.03(L) of the Civil Service Rules by
violating the following rules and regulations of the Austin Police Department:
Austin Police Department Policy 900.1.1: General Conduct and
Responsibilities: Responsibility to Know and Comply
900.1.1 Responsibility to Know and Comply
The rules of conduct set forth in this order do not serve as an all-inclusive list of
requirements, limitations, or prohibitions on employee conduct and activities;
employees are required to know and comply with all Department policies,
procedures, and written directives.
(a)
Employees will maintain a working knowledge and comply with the
laws, ordinances, statutes, regulations, and APD written directives
which pertain to their assigned duties.
(b)
Employees who do not understand their assigned duties or
responsibilities will read the relevant directives and guidelines, and
3
will consult their immediate supervisor for clarification and
explanation.
(c)
A lack of knowledge of an APD written directive is not a defense to
disciplinary action.
To Wit:
Texas Penal Code Section 49.02: Public Intoxication
(a)
A person commits an offense if the person appears in a public place
while intoxicated to the degree that the person may endanger the
person or another.
(c)
Except as provided by Subsection (e), an offense under this section
is a Class C misdemeanor.
Austin Police Department Policy 900.3.2(a): General Conduct and
Responsibilities: Acts Bringing Discredit Upon the Department
900.3.2(a) Acts Bringing Discredit Upon the Department
Since the conduct of personnel both on-duty or off-duty may reflect directly upon
the Department, employees must conduct themselves at all times in a manner which
does not bring reproach, discredit, or embarrassment to the Department or to the
City.
(a)
Employees will not commit any act which tends to destroy public
confidence in, and respect for, the Department or which is
prejudicial to the good order, efficiency, or discipline of the
Department.
By copy of this memo, Ofc. Carrasco is hereby advised of this temporary suspension and
that the suspension may be appealed to the Civil Service Commission by filing with the
Director of Civil Service, within ten (10) daysafter receipt of a copy of this memo, a proper
notice of appeal in accordance with Section 143.010 of the Texas Local Government Code.
By copy of this memo and as required by Section 143.057 of the Texas Local Government
Code, Ofc. Carrasco is hereby advised that such section and the Agreement Between the
City of Austin and the Austin Police Association provide for an appeal to an independent
third-party hearing examiner, in accordance with the provisions of such Agreement. If
appeal is made to a hearing examiner, all rights of appeal to a District Court are waived,
except as provided by Subsection (j) of Section 143.057 of the Texas Local Government
Code. That section states that the State District Court may hear appeals of an award of a
hearing examiner only on the grounds that the arbitration panel was without jurisdiction or
exceeded its jurisdiction, or that the order was procured by fraud, collusion or other
unlawful means. In order to appeal to a hearing examiner, the original notice of appeal
submitted to the Director of Civil Service must state that appeal is made to a hearing
examiner.
4
Chief 3961 of
7/18/2025
Police
Date
Staniszenski JASON for Chief DAYS
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I hereby acknowledge receipt of the above and foregoing memorandum of temporary
suspension and I have been advised that if I desire to appeal that I have ten (10) calendar
days from the date of this receipt to file written notice of appeal with the Director of Civil
Service in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government
Code.
Jeff Police Officer John Carrasco #6626
7/18/25
Date
5