Rodney J. Davis

Rodney J. Davis

Rodney J. Davis
Badge #15749, Black Male
Police Officer at 33rd Precinct since March 2026
Also served at 67th Precinct, Police Service Area 7 VIPER
Service started January 2015, made $156,000 last year, Tax #957518

Substantiated Allegations:
Force: Chokehold
Force: Physical force
Force: Restricted Breathing
Abuse of Authority: Improper use of body-worn camera
Discourtesy: Word

Complaints

5 Complaints
14 Allegations
5 Substantiated
1 Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
1 Substantiated (Formalized Training)
3 Substantiated (Charges)
2 Complainant Uncooperative
3 Unable to Determine
1 Unfounded
3 Within NYPD Guidelines

Complaint #202502736, March 2025
Allegation: Force: Physical force
Complainant: Age 45-49
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Charges)
NYPD Conclusion: APU Closed: Previously adjudicated, with discipline
APU Case Status: Closed: Previously adjudicated, with discipline, August 3, 2026
Penalty: Command Discipline A 5 days
additional details

Complaint #202503907, March 2025
Allegation: Force: Physical force
Complainant: Black Male, 15-17
CCRB Conclusion: Within NYPD Guidelines
Allegation: Force: Chokehold
Complainant: Black Male, 15-17
CCRB Conclusion: Unable to Determine
Allegation: Force: Restricted Breathing
Complainant: Black Male, 15-17
CCRB Conclusion: Unable to Determine
Allegation: Force: Physical force
Complainant: Black Male, 15-17
CCRB Conclusion: Unable to Determine
Allegation: Abuse of Authority: Improper use of body-worn camera
Complainant: Male, 15-17
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Formalized Training)
additional details

Complaint #202311492, November 2023
Allegation: Force: Physical force
Complainant: Dominican Male, 25-29
CCRB Conclusion: Within NYPD Guidelines
Allegation: Force: Physical force
Complainant: Male
CCRB Conclusion: Within NYPD Guidelines
additional details

Complaint #202203009, April 2022
Allegation: Force: Chokehold
Complainant: Age 45-49
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Charges)
Allegation: Force: Restricted Breathing
Complainant: Age 45-49
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Charges)
Allegation: Discourtesy: Word
Complainant: Age 45-49
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
Allegation: Force: Handcuffs too tight
Complainant: Age 45-49
CCRB Conclusion: Unfounded
NYPD Conclusion: APU Command Discipline B
APU Plea Penalty: Forfeit vacation 10 days
APU Case Status: Closed: Resolved by plea, April 13, 2026
Penalty: Forfeit vacation 10 days / Command Discipline B
Documents: Complaint Closing Report
additional details

Complaint #201902637, March 2019
Allegation: Force: Physical force
Complainant: Male, 17
CCRB Conclusion: Complainant Uncooperative
Allegation: Force: Restricted Breathing
Complainant: Male, 17
CCRB Conclusion: Complainant Uncooperative
additional details

Complaint #202502736, March 2025
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Force: Physical force Age 45-49 Substantiated (Charges)
NYPD Conclusion: APU Closed: Previously adjudicated, with discipline
APU Case Status: Closed: Previously adjudicated, with discipline, August 3, 2026
Penalty: Command Discipline A 5 days
additional details
Complaint #202503907, March 2025
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Force: Physical force Black Male, 15-17 Within NYPD Guidelines
Force: Chokehold Black Male, 15-17 Unable to Determine
Force: Restricted Breathing Black Male, 15-17 Unable to Determine
Force: Physical force Black Male, 15-17 Unable to Determine
Abuse of Authority: Improper use of body-worn camera Male, 15-17 Substantiated (Formalized Training)
additional details
Complaint #202311492, November 2023
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Force: Physical force Dominican Male, 25-29 Within NYPD Guidelines
Force: Physical force Male Within NYPD Guidelines
additional details
Complaint #202203009, April 2022
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Force: Chokehold Age 45-49 Substantiated (Charges)
Force: Restricted Breathing Age 45-49 Substantiated (Charges)
Discourtesy: Word Age 45-49 Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
Force: Handcuffs too tight Age 45-49 Unfounded
NYPD Conclusion: APU Command Discipline B
APU Plea Penalty: Forfeit vacation 10 days
APU Case Status: Closed: Resolved by plea, April 13, 2026
Penalty: Forfeit vacation 10 days / Command Discipline B
Documents: Complaint Closing Report
additional details
Complaint #201902637, March 2019
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Force: Physical force Male, 17 Complainant Uncooperative
Force: Restricted Breathing Male, 17 Complainant Uncooperative
additional details

Conclusion Meanings:

'Substantiated': The misconduct occurred and it violated the rules. The NYPD has discretion over what, if any, discipline is imposed.
'Unable to Determine': The alleged conduct was investigated but could not determine both that the conduct occurred and that it broke the rules.
'Unfounded': Evidence suggests that the event or alleged conduct did not occur.
'Within NYPD Guidelines': The conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.

Further details on conclusions.


Lawsuits

Henry, Emmanuel By His Fng Henry, Emal vs City of New York
Case # 506071/2020, Supreme Court - Kings, March 19, 2020
Complaint
Description: On March 16, 2019, Plaintiff E.H. (a minor) was participating in a Police Athletic League basketball game at a NYC public middle school in Brooklyn. During the game, a player on the opposing team was ejected for trash-talking Plaintiff and the game was suspended shortly thereafter. NYPD Officer Davis advised Plaintiff E.H. to stay back so the opposing team could leave. Plaintiff E.H. complied with the Officer's advice, and stayed inside the building to wait for his Uber. While walking to his Uber, a member of the opposing team said something to Plaintiff E.H., and Plaintiff E.H. responded "Why are you still talking." Officer Davis, who had been standing with the members of the opposing team suddenly and imme...