LAS VEGAS (KTNV) — A newly filed federal lawsuit alleges a pattern of misconduct by Las Vegas City Marshals, including unlawful arrest and illegally issued citations.
Derek Myers, who filed the civil rights complaint Thursday in Nevada's U.S. District Court, says he was a victim of this when marshals overstepped their authority.
We were able to see what happened to Myers on Jan. 9 because he was wearing a body camera.
PART ONE | Our investigation begins after Derek Myers reached out to 13 Investigates alleging Las Vegas City Marshals overstepped their authority.
"A lot of people want to know, why do I carry a body cam?" Myers said. "And it's because I've been in news long enough."
Long enough for the online journalist from Ohio to know anything can happen at any time — and you just might want a record of it.
The Las Vegas marshals who stopped Myers on U.S. 95 were wearing body cameras, too, but the city refuses to release the footage, citing an open case against Myers, though nearly three months after his arrest, no charges have been filed.
Myers's visit to Las Vegas in January was the beginning of a journey down a rabbit hole of jurisdictional jeopardy that landed him in city jail.
"I was in jail for 17 hours, and it was very traumatic to me," Myers said.
To show you how he wound up there, we have to rewind a bit to that January night.
Myers had just left the Consumer Electronics Show and was driving to a colleague's home when City of Las Vegas deputy marshals pulled him over on the freeway near the Craig Road off-ramp.
"They're not supposed to be on the freeways," Myers said.
He demanded they call in Nevada State Police, who did give us their body camera footage, which includes this exchange:
TROOPER: What are you guys looking for, us to handle it?
MARSHAL: Kind of, just explain to him, normally, we would handle it, we'll pull him out of the car, we'll do it. If he doesn't want to do SFSTs (Standardized Field Sobriety Tests), I'll take him to jail. It is what it is. He's just saying he doesn't want to because we have no authority on the highway.
Marshals are part of the City of Las Vegas Department of Public Safety. City records show the unit was established in 1982, first as park rangers. Their jurisdiction was later expanded to make them Category 1 peace officers, meaning they can conduct investigations, make arrests and issue citations.
But state law says they can only do that in certain places because they're what's called a "limited jurisdiction" agency.
Limitations on the city marshals office were part of a legislative bargaining that dates back several decades to when the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department was formed.
Las Vegas attorney Adam Breeden is working with Myers on his federal civil rights case.
"Under the Nevada Revised Statutes, these are not officers — that is, the city marshals — that have unlimited statewide jurisdiction," Breeden told me. "They're limited only to city property such as parks or city buildings. They should not be out there on the highway stopping people for traffic infractions."
If they do, city policy says they have to secure the scene and call in the law enforcement agency that has primary jurisdiction to take over. In Myers's case, because he was on a highway, that would be Nevada State Police. But he and Breeden say the body camera video shows the state trooper may not know the rules, either.
TROOPER: Why don't you exit the vehicle and talk to these guys?
MYERS: You want me out of the vehicle?
TROOPER: Yeah, did they ask you to exit the vehicle at all?
MYERS: Well, they're marshals. They have no jurisdiction.
TROOPER: They're Category 1 peace officers. They can make traffic stops, they can arrest you, they can do all that stuff.
MYERS: They have no jurisdiction out here.
TROOPER: They do. So, Derek, I'm going to ask you to get out right now.
The Nevada POST Standards Division chief confirms that Category 1 officer certification does not convey statewide jurisdiction, writing:
"The categories of peace officer are based on the actual policing authority of the employing agency. It is not related to jurisdiction other than type of agency."
When we asked Nevada State Police why things with Myers went down the way they did, the agency did not respond.
"Why the highway patrol did not take control over the marshals, we don't know. They appeared to be confused themselves about the jurisdictional limits of the city marshals' office. And that led to a wrongful arrest," Breeden said.
In Myers's body cam video, marshals accuse him of a series of traffic violations, including speeding, following too closely and driving on the shoulder. They also suspected him of driving under the influence.
On Myers's video, a marshal is heard asking, "Is it OK if we do some field sobriety tests on you, so that way I can rule out — make sure you're not intoxicated, put you back in the car, and you'll be on your way."
Myers agreed to the field sobriety tests, which the marshal says he failed.
MYERS: Why are you arresting me?
MARSHAL: Right now, you did not pass any of the tests that I conducted, so you are being placed under arrest for suspicion of DUI.
Nevada State Police was still on site for this, but their video shows they did not participate in the tests or the arrest, even when Myers asked for another test.
MYERS: Do you have a breathalyzer?
MARSHAL: I do not. No.
MYERS: Well, I'm sure these guys (NSP) do.
MARSHAL: So, in regards to this (he grabs Myers's body cam), since you are in custody, we are done recording.
I asked Myers if he had been drunk that night.
MYERS: No, I've never had a drink of alcohol in my life.
DARCY SPEARS: Were you on any kind of drugs?
MYERS: I have never been high in my life.
The lack of drugs in Myers's system was confirmed the next day by an independent lab he went to for testing right after he was released from jail. Any alcohol in his system would have been gone by then.
He'd also demanded a blood test while at the jail, but now, nearly three months later, he's still waiting on the results. No criminal complaint has been filed, either.
After Myers brought his story to 13 Investigates, we spent weeks digging up documentation on the marshals' jurisdiction.
We found that NRS 280.125 limits their jurisdiction and authority to “real property owned, leased or otherwise under the control" of the City of Las Vegas.
Back in 2014, police union general counsel and Former Clark County District Attorney David Roger wrote a legal opinion regarding jurisdiction. Roger wrote, "While a deputy city marshal is a peace officer and may enforce state laws, the legislature has restricted their jurisdiction" to real property owned, leased, or controlled by the city.
The city's website says the same thing, describing real property as "buildings, land...the Fremont Street Experience, parks, plazas, trails, and 130 city facilities."
We also found a Supreme Court brief filed in a 2023 case involving the city and the police union, where the city attorney writes:
"(City of Las Vegas Department of Public Safety) is a limited jurisdiction agency whose duties are necessarily limited to protection of city property and operation of the city jail."
So, who oversees the marshals — and what do they think?
Chief Jason Potts leads the city's Department of Public Safety. Since he declined our on-camera interview request, we found a video clip on the city's YouTube channel from two years ago with then-Mayor Carolyn Goodman.
CHIEF POTTS: We are a limited jurisdiction department.
MAYOR GOODMAN: Are you ever outside the jurisdiction and helping out in North Las Vegas or in the county?
POTTS: Not typically, no. We have limited jurisdiction, so we typically just focus in on our parks and our facilities and our, you know, property.
Still, despite the documentation, video evidence, and the chief's own words, Potts sent us this statement:
“We are confident the activities of the city marshals are consistent with their authority and jurisdiction. Our marshals are fully certified peace officers, which under state law allows them to enforce ‘state laws and city and county ordinances on real property owned, leased or otherwise under the control of the participating political subdivision.’ This includes traffic enforcement of moving violations within the city, which the Legislature allowed in 1995. With this authority, and for the safety of our community, our officers will respond appropriately when they observe dangerous, criminal or life-threatening situations.”
I asked exactly what the legislature allowed in 1995. Instead of pointing to what's in the law, the city pointed to what isn't — a single sentence removed from the 1993 law that prohibited enforcement of traffic violations outside the boundaries of public parks and recreational facilities.
Our legal experts say all that matters is what's in the law, which includes clear jurisdictional boundaries.
We uncovered the city itself has been inconsistent — changing its website after 13 Investigates started asking questions and requesting interviews. The page originally contained a limited description, including the marshals' limited jurisdiction. After our inquiries, the city changed the page, adding two more paragraphs detailing more authority than what the marshals are granted by state law.
Breeden says that changes nothing.
"They're stopping people outside of what their jurisdiction under the law is," he said.
"This is a systemic thing that they're doing," Myers added. "It's not just to me."
Myers maintains he's a victim of wrongful arrest — but with his lawsuit, he's hoping to let a judge decide.
You can read the complaint here:
2025.03.27 Doc 1 Complaint & Jury Demand by aroberts.news on Scribd
In pursuing his lawsuit, Myers gathered additional video evidence of marshals operating outside their jurisdictional boundaries. And as my investigation continued, I learned those actions could come back to bite city taxpayers.
"I am a person who's not just going to lay down and take this," Myers said. "What they're doing is wrong."
PART TWO | After Derek Myers bailed out of jail, he started watching and recording the city marshals with help from a local freelance photojournalist. Our investigation continues:
His videos show a traffic stop near Main Street and Ogden Avenue where marshals pulled over and searched an SUV, went through the driver's purse, then arrested her for traffic violations and impounded her vehicle.
Next, marshals stopped a homeless man near 6th Street, searched through his belongings, then kicked the man in the foot while saying, "You have no feeling in that foot?"
Then they send him away with a warning to stay out of the street and seek resources at the Courtyard Homeless Resource Center.
Another stop included a man marshals pulled over on East Charleston Boulevard near 22nd Street. Myers talked to the driver, who told him, "I was coming from here, from work. It's my work. It's my store. I was closing up."
In the video, you can see a marshal talking to the driver and then letting him go.
"They could be calling in actual qualified officers if they see an issue to make an arrest, and instead the city marshals are doing that on their own," said Breeden. "And that risks people who actually have committed crimes having those cases dismissed, and they get off scot-free."
"They're out there enforcing the law. Why should we care?" I asked Breeden.
"Well," Breeden responded, "we want people to be safe, and we want the law to be enforced — but the problem is these city marshals are not trained properly and equipped properly to do the job that they're doing. What they're doing is subjecting the City of Las Vegas and the marshals' office to liability for claims for false imprisonment and false arrest."
And for anyone who sues and wins, Breeden said, "It'll be on the taxpayers' dime."
City taxpayers already pay a big bill for the marshals. City budget records show the marshals will cost $204.5 million this fiscal year. That's almost $13 million more than the year before. The force includes 94 marshals, 13 sergeants and six lieutenants overseen by Department of Public Safety Chief Potts.
"I don't know why the city marshals are doing this," Breeden said.
And we — the taxpayers — already pay for other departments to do this work. The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department covers the city and county, and Nevada State Police cover our highways.
As for the city marshals, Breeden wonders about their motivation.
"I don't know if they are doing this for revenue reasons, trying to write additional tickets for the city," he said.
Through a public records request, 13 Investigates learned city marshal arrests and citations from January 2024 through March of this year brought in more than $336,000. That includes court and administrative fees the city says are paid to local and state entities.
A case involving Clark County park rangers has already gone to the Nevada Supreme Court. Rangers and marshals are governed by the same state statute setting limited jurisdiction. The court ruled that rangers are not police officers under the statutory definition and that the legislature did not intend for specialized law enforcement units to be law enforcement agencies.
On Monday, a bill was quietly introduced in the Nevada State Senate that seeks to expand the authority of Las Vegas city marshals and Clark County park rangers. When questioned about the bill, a city spokesperson said:
"The city of Las Vegas was not involved in drafting or introducing SB449. As we do with all legislation, the city will review and monitor this bill."
We also asked Las Vegas police about it. On Thursday, a department spokesperson told 13 Investigates:
"Metro did not assist in drafting this bill and we are not in support of it."