New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings [OATH] Administrative Law Judge Astrid B. Gloade recommended that the appointing authority terminate the employment of a correction officer [Officer] she found had retaliated against an incarcerated person.
Judge Gloade found that the New York City Department of Correction met its burden of proof that Officer used excessive and unnecessary force when he threw urine on an incarcerated person and failed to submit an accurate and complete use of force report regarding his actions. The ALJ noted Officer conceded the Department's allegations and the only disputed fact was "whether liquid that the incarcerated person tossed out of the cell before [Officer's] actions made contact with [Officer]".
Noting Officer's testimony that since the incident, "he has grown mentally and learned from the experience" and the proven misconduct arises from a single incident for which Officer has expressed remorse, Judge Gloade held that Officer's "conduct was egregious and raises grave concerns about his fitness to perform his duties as a correction officer."
Although Officer's Counsel argued that a penalty of not more than a 60-day suspension without pay was "appropriate in light of all of the circumstances" considered during the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge opined Officer's "disciplinary record, which includes a prior, recent use of force and a domestic violence incident, offers little by way of mitigation."
Click HERE to access the ALJ's findings and recommendation posted on the Internet.
___________
A Reasonable Disciplinary Penalty Under the Circumstances. The text of this NYPPL e-book focuses on court and administrative decisions addressing disciplinary penalties imposed on officers and employees in the public service in instances where the individual has been found guilty of misconduct and, or, incompetence. For additional information about this e-book, and access to a free excerpt, click HERE.