A federal judge has imposed sanctions on the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office for destroying evidence in a racial-profiling case, and Sheriff Joe Arpaio must answer questions regarding an immigration file he kept.

U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow's order, released Friday, also calls on the Sheriff's Office to try to recover e-mails that were deleted and to swear under oath to steps it took to gather the records.

The racial-profiling lawsuit was filed in December 2007 following a sheriff's crime-suppression operation in Cave Creek that included the arrest of Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres.

Melendres is seeking to stop what he calls "illegal, discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against Hispanics in Maricopa County." The case now includes five individuals who claim deputies have detained them because of the color of their skin, and their lawyers have sought records from the sheriff's crime-suppression operations.

The Sheriff's Office has denied it engages in racial profiling, but the office has acknowledged it destroyed records from those sweeps and deleted e-mails among employees regarding those operations.

Peter Kozinets, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said the ruling would give his clients access to e-mails if they are recovered, and the Sheriff's Office must describe in detail the measures it took to recover the electronic messages.

A key part of the order, Kozinets said, was the requirement that Arpaio answer questions about his 800-page immigration file that was turned over in late January.

"The judge clearly recognizes in the order the (Sheriff's Office) had an obligation to preserve other relevant evidence, and it destroyed the evidence," Kozinets said.

Arpaio on Friday evening said he and his office would comply with the judge's order.

"This is just another case. It's the nature of doing business," said Arpaio, who has faced numerous state and federal lawsuits.

Arpaio said he has won 12 straight federal cases filed against him, with most coming from county-jail inmates, and he expressed confidence his office would again prevail.

A hearing is set for March 19, when the judge will determine what additional information attorneys for the plaintiffs may seek from the sheriff based on new documents that may be produced.