When a Mississippi deputy sheriff wants to do off-duty private security work in uniform with a county weapon and vehicle, who has to approve it: the sheriff or the county board of supervisors?

Plain-English summary

Sheriff Shane Phelps of Panola County asked whether his deputies need approval from the county board of supervisors before working off-duty private security jobs while using their official uniform, weapon, and patrol vehicle. The AG said no, the approval is the sheriff's alone.

Miss. Code § 17-25-11 sets up parallel approval chains for three categories of law enforcement officers: municipal officers, deputy sheriffs, and Department of Public Safety officers. Each category has one approving authority, not two. For municipal officers, the governing authority and the chief executive approve. For deputy sheriffs, the sheriff approves. For DPS officers, the Commissioner approves. The board of supervisors does not appear in the deputy-sheriff chain at all.

The opinion ties this together with subsection (2), which adds substantive criteria the approving authority must apply: the proposed off-duty work must not be "likely to bring disrepute to the employing jurisdiction or its law enforcement agency, the officer at issue, or law enforcement generally," and the use must "promote the public interest." Subsection (2) lists the same approving authorities as subsection (1), confirming the structural parallelism. The sheriff applies these criteria; the board of supervisors does not.

Approval is also expressly per-employee. The statute requires "an employee-by-employee basis and not by general order." So a sheriff cannot simply authorize all deputies to take any private security work; each deputy and each engagement is a separate approval, and proceedings must be made part of the public record.

For Sheriff Phelps practically, this means: he can approve deputies' off-duty private security work in uniform with county weapon and vehicle on his own authority. He does not need a board-of-supervisors resolution. He does need a per-employee record, the public-interest finding, and the no-disrepute finding.

What this means for you

If you are a Mississippi sheriff: The approval authority is yours. Build a written process: each deputy submits the engagement details (employer, location, hours, duties), you review against the public-interest and no-disrepute criteria, and you record the approval in writing on a per-engagement basis. Make the records available as public records when requested.

If you are a deputy sheriff working off-duty: Get the sheriff's written approval before the first shift. Verbal approval is not what the statute calls for. The approval is per-engagement, so a new private security job means a new approval. Working in uniform without an approval is exposure for both you and the sheriff.

If you sit on a county board of supervisors: This is not your decision to make. You should not be passing resolutions purporting to approve or disapprove off-duty private security arrangements; the statute gives that authority exclusively to the sheriff. If you have concerns about a particular arrangement, raise them with the sheriff, who is the statutory decision-maker.

If you run a private security firm hiring off-duty deputies: Verify the deputy has the sheriff's approval for your specific engagement before they show up in uniform. Keep documentation. If a complaint or incident arises, the deputy's approval status will be the first question, and a missing or general approval is a problem.

If you are a county attorney: Build the per-employee record-keeping into the sheriff's office procedures. The statute requires public records of these proceedings, so the records system needs to handle requests cleanly. Resolve the approval question at the sheriff level; do not let supervisors second-guess it through resolution.

Common questions

Why does the statute treat counties differently from municipalities?

Mississippi sheriffs are constitutionally elected county officers with significant independent authority over their offices. Municipal police chiefs answer to a governing authority and chief executive. The statute reflects that structural difference: municipalities require both the governing authority and the chief executive to approve, while counties channel the decision through the sheriff alone.

Can the sheriff delegate the approval?

The opinion does not address delegation. The statute uses "the sheriff of a county must approve," which sounds personal. As a practical matter, sheriffs may have a chief deputy or supervisor handle the paperwork; the formal approval should still bear the sheriff's name and signature.

What does "employee-by-employee basis and not by general order" mean?

You cannot do "all deputies are approved for all off-duty private security work" as a single sweeping order. Each deputy needs an approval, and (most prudent reading) each engagement needs a separate approval. The "not by general order" language is in the statute precisely to prevent the approval from becoming a rubber stamp.

What if the off-duty deputy gets sued for something they did during a private security gig?

This opinion does not address liability. Off-duty law enforcement engaged in private security may be exposed to suits in their personal capacity, in their official capacity, or both, depending on facts. The county's indemnification posture is governed by separate statutes and the Mississippi Tort Claims Act framework, which are not addressed here.

Can the sheriff revoke an approval?

The statute does not expressly address revocation, but the approving authority logically retains the power to withdraw approval. If the sheriff learns the engagement is causing disrepute or no longer serving the public interest, withdrawing approval is consistent with the statutory criteria.

What's the public-records angle?

Subsection (1) requires that "any proceedings regarding application or approval and the minutes regarding same shall be a public record." That is a built-in transparency mandate. Citizens, journalists, or the deputy's employer can request the approval records.

Background and statutory framework

Miss. Code Ann. § 17-25-11(1) authorizes "[c]ertified law enforcement officers or certified part-time law enforcement officers, as defined in Section 45-6-3, who are employed by a county, municipality or the Department of Public Safety" to wear the official uniform and use the official firearm and vehicle while performing private security services in off-duty hours. The statute then sets up three approval channels:

For municipal officers: "The governing authority of a municipality must approve of such use of the uniform, official weapon and vehicle by municipal law enforcement officers by act spread upon the minutes of such board and approved by the chief executive."

For deputy sheriffs: "The sheriff of a county must approve such use of the uniform, official weapon and vehicle by deputy sheriffs."

For DPS officers: "The Commissioner of the Department of Public Safety must approve such use of the uniform, official weapon and vehicle by officers of the department."

The statute then specifies that approval "shall be on an employee-by-employee basis and not by general order. Any proceedings regarding application or approval and the minutes regarding same shall be a public record."

Subsection (2) adds the substantive findings the approving authority must make. Each approving authority "shall determine that the proposed employment is not likely to bring disrepute to the employing jurisdiction or its law enforcement agency, the officer at issue, or law enforcement generally" and that the "use" promotes the public interest. The list of approving authorities in subsection (2) parallels subsection (1) (governing authority and chief executive for municipalities, sheriff for counties, DPS Commissioner for DPS), confirming there is no second layer of approval.

The cross-reference to "certified law enforcement officers" or "certified part-time law enforcement officers" runs to Miss. Code § 45-6-3, the standards-and-training definitional section.

Citations

The governing statute: Miss. Code Ann. § 17-25-11, particularly subsections (1) (approval channels) and (2) (substantive findings). The certification cross-reference: Miss. Code Ann. § 45-6-3.

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/divisions/opinions-and-policy/recent-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/S.-Phelps-November-12-2025-Private-Security-Services-by-Deputy-Sheriffs.pdf

Original opinion text

November 12, 2025

The Honorable Shane Phelps
Sheriff, Panola County
300 James Rudd Drive
Batesville, Mississippi 38606

Re: Private Security Services by Deputy Sheriffs

Dear Sheriff Phelps:

The Office of the Attorney General has received your request for an official opinion.

Question Presented

Does the sheriff need approval from the board of supervisors to approve deputy sheriffs to work for private security services in off-duty hours under Mississippi Code Annotated Section 17-25-11?

Brief Response

The sheriff must approve the use of the uniform, official weapon and vehicle by deputy sheriffs for private security services in off-duty hours. Section 17-25-11 does not require approval by the county board of supervisors.

Applicable Law and Discussion

Section 17-25-11 provides in relevant part:

(1) Certified law enforcement officers or certified part-time law enforcement officers, as defined in Section 45-6-3, who are employed by a county, municipality or the Department of Public Safety may wear the official uniform and may utilize the official firearm and the official vehicle issued by the employing jurisdiction while in the performance of private security services in off-duty hours. The governing authority of a municipality must approve of such use of the uniform, official weapon and vehicle by municipal law enforcement officers by act spread upon the minutes of such board and approved by the chief executive. The sheriff of a county must approve such use of the uniform, official weapon and vehicle by deputy sheriffs. The Commissioner of the Department of Public Safety must approve such use of the uniform, official weapon and vehicle by officers of the department. Approval shall be on an employee-by-employee basis and not by general order. Any proceedings regarding application or approval and the minutes regarding same shall be a public record.

(emphasis added).

For counties, the sheriff must approve the use of the uniform, official weapon and vehicle for private security services by deputy sheriffs in off-duty hours. Subsection (2) of this statute provides that "[e]ach governing board and chief executive, sheriff or the Commissioner of the Department of Public Safety…" must determine that the proposed employment is not likely to bring disrepute to "the employing jurisdiction or its law enforcement agency, the officer at issue, or law enforcement generally" and that such use (of the uniform, official weapon and vehicle) promotes the public interest. Miss. Code Ann. § 17-25-11(2) (emphasis added). This approval mirrors the approval required in Subsection (1), with the governing authority and the chief executive approving use by municipal law enforcement, the sheriff approving use by deputy sheriffs, and the Public Safety Commissioner approving use by Department of Public Safety officers. Section 17-25-11 does not require approval by the county board of supervisors for deputy sheriffs to use the uniform, official weapon and vehicle for private security services in off-duty hours or a determination by the board of supervisors that such use promotes the public interest, and the proposed employment is not likely to bring disrepute to the jurisdiction, agency, its officers, or law enforcement in general.

If this office may be of any further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

LYNN FITCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL
By:

/s/ Beebe Garrard
Beebe Garrard
Special Assistant Attorney General