Volusia Sheriff’s Office Internal Affairs Report: Layton and Craig
This page provides public access to a redacted, 16-page Volusia Sheriff’s Office Internal Affairs report identified as IA25-009. The document contains allegations and witness statements, and readers should review the complete report rather than treating this summary as an independent finding by JM Audits.
Report Summary
The Volusia Sheriff’s Office conducted an independent review of how the South Daytona Police Department handled allegations concerning former Officer Matthew Layton and the work of former Lieutenant Bryan Craig in the earlier internal investigation. According to the report, the underlying complaint involved alleged inappropriate Snapchat communications between Layton and a juvenile, along with questions about possible untruthfulness, compliance with instructions and the delayed preservation and investigation of evidence. Several witnesses alleged that Craig knew about the matter earlier than he acknowledged and focused more heavily on identifying who disclosed information than on the underlying complaint, while the report stated that a direct order to Layton could not be established and described Craig’s response as possible neglect of duty. The report says the Florida Department of Law Enforcement completed a separate criminal review and determined that Layton’s conduct did not rise to a level warranting criminal prosecution. The Volusia report was prepared for delivery to South Daytona Police Chief Joseph LaSata, with any subsequent disciplinary action or required FDLE paperwork left to the South Daytona Police Department.
Read the Complete Redacted Report
The viewer below lets you read the document without leaving this page. On a phone, use the viewer controls to zoom or move between pages; if the viewer does not load, use the download button beneath it.
Important Context
This is a redacted government record. It includes allegations, witness recollections, investigative analysis and quoted language that may be disputed; the presence of an allegation in an official report does not by itself establish that the allegation is true. JM Audits has provided the document for public-interest reporting and transparency and has not independently verified every statement in it.