by Andrew Alonzo | aalonzo@claremont-courier.com

and Mick Rhodes | editor@claremont-courier.com

Former Claremont Police Department officer Gabriel Arellanes, 32, has been arrested on suspicion of on-duty sexual assault and is facing a felony criminal charge of forced oral copulation. Arellanes, the City of Claremont, and 10 city employees are also named in a wide-ranging civil complaint seeking $20 million in damages.

Both cases stem from Arellanes’ February 2024 arrest of a 38-year-old Highland, California woman known as Jane Doe in legal filings.

The San Bernardino County District Attorney’s office filed a felony charge of forced oral copulation against Arellanes on March 7. He was arrested by San Bernardino County Sheriff Department’s Specialized Investigations Division on March 14 and released on bail the following day. He is due to appear before Judge Ingrid Uhler in Rancho Cucamonga Superior Court on April 30.

If convicted in the criminal case, Arellanes faces up eight years in state prison and could be compelled to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

The civil case was filed October 4, 2024 by Doe’s lawyer, Jerry Steering. It accuses Arellanes, the City of Claremont, and 10 city employees (each named as “John Doe”) of unlawful or unreasonable seizure, use of unreasonable force, and violation of substantive due process, all violations of 42 United States Code section 1983 under the Fourth Amendment. It also claims the defendants violated California Civil Code Section 1708.5, which covers sexual battery, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code Section 52.1, and includes accusations of battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress. It seeks damages “in excess of $20,000,000” for physical, mental and emotional injuries, distress, pain and suffering, attorney’s fees, and medical and psychological costs.

The City of Claremont, through attorneys Mark Rutter and Kimberly Sarmiento of Carpenter, Rothans and Dumont LLP, answered the complaint on November 15, 2024, denying the allegations and demanding a jury trial.

On January 15, Arellanes’ attorneys in the civil case, John McCormick, Konrad Rasmussen, and Brett Cirincione of McCormick, Mitchell & Rasmussen, also demanded a jury trial. A month later they filed a motion to “… stay all proceedings in this civil action pending the resolution of the criminal investigation and any resulting criminal proceedings.”

Reached via email, Claremont Public Information Officer Bevin Handel provided more information about the cases. “The City learned of the allegations on March 18, 2024, when a liability claim was filed with the City,” Handel wrote. “Arellanes was immediately placed on administrative leave and his peace officer powers suspended as the allegations were investigated. He remained on leave while under investigation and resigned on January 29, 2025.”

The city paid Arellanes his full salary, $76,574, during the near 11 months he was on paid administrative leave.

The civil case filing alleges Arellanes questioned Doe shortly before midnight February 16, 2024 after discovering her “engaged in romantic activities” with a man in the back seat of a car parked off Mt. Baldy Road in Claremont. That encounter led to Doe being arrested for misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia.

“JANE DOE was told that she would be taken to the Pomona station to be searched by a female officer because there were no females at” the Claremont Police Station, read the complaint. (CPD has seven sworn female officers and 34 male officers.) The complaint alleges Arellanes stopped his patrol car several times on the way to the Pomona Police Station and assaulted her, “… essentially feeling her up and groping her in a sexually assaultive manner.”

After being searched at the Pomona station, Arellanes drove Doe to the Claremont Police Station, where she was booked, according to the complaint. After being released she accepted Arellanes’ offer of a ride to the Montclair Transcenter, where the officer parked in a “dark and remote areas of the parking lot,” reads the complaint.

The complaint is explicit in its allegations: “Defendant ARELLANES then walked around from the driver’s seat / side of the patrol car to the passenger side of the patrol car, with his erect penis protruding out of his pants, and grabbed JANE DOE’s head and physically forced JANE DOE’s head down onto his penis and physically forced her to orally copulate him, all while JANE DOE was looking at defendant ARELLANES’ pistol; scaring her to not resist her head being pulled down onto ARELLANES’ penis, and scared not to orally copulate him, due to his power over her as a police officer, and scared that under the circumstances, ARELLANES would physically harm her for any refusal, resistance of failure to orally copulate him,” reads the complaint. “After defendant ARELLANES ejaculated into and onto JANE DOE, he then left JANE DOE at the Montclair Transcenter.”

The case was filed in United States District Court Central District of California, as three of the allegations involve civil rights violations.

In their plea to stay the civil case, Arellanes lawyers argue, “The parallel criminal investigation substantially implicates Gabriel Arellanes’ Fifth Amendment rights, and all five Keating [v. Office of Thrift Supervision] factors strongly support a stay of these proceedings. Gabriel Arellanes should not be forced to choose between defending himself in this civil litigation and preserving his constitutional rights while the criminal investigation remains under active review by the District Attorney’s Office. The minimal prejudice to Plaintiff from a temporary delay is far outweighed by the significant constitutional rights at stake and the public’s interest in allowing the criminal process to proceed without interference from parallel civil proceedings.”

Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong is presiding over the civil case.

On March 14, Doe’s attorneys filed a motion in opposition of the stay.

Lawyers representing Arellanes and the City of Claremont did not respond to requests for comment.

The San Bernardino County’s District Attorney’s office did not respond to requests for comment.