In re Khan

• Docket Number: 2267-2022
• Decision Date: 16 January 2024
• Parties: IN THE MATTER OF KASHEF KHAN
• Court: Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

1

IN THE MATTER OF KASHEF KHAN

No. 2267-2022

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

January 16, 2024

UNREPORTED ^[*]

Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County Case No. C-02-CV-22-000461

Tang, Albright, Kenney, James A., III (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.

OPINION

Tang, J.

2

The Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County affirmed the decision of an administrative hearing board that found appellant Kashef Khan, a trooper with the Maryland Department of State Police ("MSP"), guilty of three misconduct charges and recommended termination of his employment. On appeal, appellant presents the following question:

[D]id the Hearing Board act as a neutral arbiter, consider the totality of the evidence, and return verdicts based on substantial evidence or were the Hearing Board's guilty verdicts an error of law, unsupported by competent, material and substantial evidence or arbitrary and capricious

For the reasons below, we shall affirm the circuit court's judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Appellant was born in Pakistan and raised in Afghanistan. He can speak five languages, with English being his fourth. He immigrated to the United States and joined the U.S. Army, serving in combat zones for fifteen years. Following his military service, he worked as an intelligence language analyst with government agencies. After that, he became a Maryland State Trooper, completing his field training at the age of 49 in the summer of 2017. Upon graduating from the academy, he was assigned to work at the Forestville Barrack in Prince George's County. During his time with MSP, appellant was recognized for his work and was awarded several accolades. These include three awards for Trooper of the Year, twice at the barrack level and once at the State level.

The Traffic Stop in the District of Columbia

The case against appellant stems from a traffic stop he conducted on June 14, 2020, outside of MSP's jurisdictional limits. The stop occurred about 0.7 miles inside the

3

boundary of Washington, D.C. ("D.C.") at the coordinates of latitude 38.815918 and longitude -77.018757.^[1] As we later explain, a contested issue was whether appellant knew that he had conducted the traffic stop in D.C. at that time.

Before we proceed further, we describe the specific geographic location in question. The area is separated by a 45-degree diagonal line that divides Maryland from southeast D.C. Interstate 295 ("I-295"), also known as the Anacostia Freeway, begins at the Interstate 495 ("I-495") interchange near the MGM National Harbor Hotel &Casino in Prince George's County, Maryland. Interstate 295 runs north into D.C., crossing a bridge over a body of water where Oxon Creek meets the Potomac River. The boundary line is just south of this bridge. There are no signs northbound on I-295 that indicate entry into D.C. The location of the traffic stop is depicted by the red balloon in the Google map below:

(Image Omitted).

4

On June 14, 2020, appellant was assigned to work a DUI saturation patrol in Prince George's County. Around 2:10 a.m., while driving northbound on I-295, appellant noticed a vehicle speeding. He paced the vehicle for about a third of a mile and confirmed that the driver exceeded the speed limit. Appellant then activated his emergency equipment and pulled over the car.

Appellant spoke to the driver of the vehicle that had four children inside. The driver admitted to consuming two glasses of wine at her aunt's house. Appellant asked if that was all she had consumed, to which the driver replied yes. Appellant then turned southward and pointed in that direction, asking, "And that was like in Maryland?" The driver said yes.

Appellant broadcasted his location via radio, stating that he was on I-295, "approximately a mile north of the Beltway." At the time, there was no police communication officer ("PCO") available at the Forestville Barrack to acknowledge appellant's location. But Corporal Matthew Atkinson, the acting sergeant at the time, acknowledged it. Corporal Atkinson did not advise appellant that he was outside MSP's jurisdictional limits.

In addition, appellant used MSP's messaging system to send a message to Trooper Brandon White, directing him to "take 295 towards DC" and informing him that appellant was "a mile past [the] Beltway." Trooper White arrived on the scene to assist appellant, thinking that the stop was in Maryland.

Appellant conducted field sobriety tests and believed the driver to be under the influence of alcohol. He arrested the driver and arranged for someone to pick up her

5

children. Afterward, appellant transported the driver to the Forestville Barrack, where she was charged with various alcohol-related traffic offenses.^[2]

The Charges Against Appellant

After the arrest, the driver filed a complaint against appellant for conducting the traffic stop outside the jurisdictional limits of MSP. During the internal investigation, MSP discovered that after ending his patrol shift, appellant accessed the computer-aided dispatch system ("CAD") and changed the recorded location of the traffic stop in D.C. to "ANACOSTIA FWY, OXON HILL" (latitude 38.79715 and longitude -77.0178). This placed the stop in Prince George's County, Maryland, about a mile and a half south of its actual location, as depicted by the white dot in the Google map below:

(Image Omitted).

6

Appellant completed an incident report in the record management system ("RMS"). He indicated that the incident occurred on "I-295 North I-495," Oxon Hill in Prince George's County, Maryland (latitude 38.799079 and longitude -77.019193).

In December 2020, Sergeant Kristopher Phillips interrogated appellant.^[3] Appellant told Sergeant Phillips that he was unaware that he conducted the traffic stop in D.C. until he was served with the notice of the driver's complaint ("Notification of Complaint"). But MSP found this statement to be false.

In June 2021, MSP charged appellant with four violations of its rules, policy, and procedures. In Count 1 (False Report), MSP alleged that, after he arrested the driver, appellant "changed the traffic stop location to show the incident took place on Anacostia Freeway at I-295/I-495 in Prince George's County, Maryland. That location was approximately 1.3 miles south of the actual stop location and was found to be a false report."

In Count 2 (False Report), MSP alleged that during his interrogation in December 2020, appellant "stated that he did not know the stop of [the driver] was in Washington, D.C. until he was served with the Notification of Complaint, MSP 178. [Appellant's] report was found to be [] false."

In Count 3 (Unbecoming Conduct), MSP alleged that appellant arrested the driver "for DUI outside of the jurisdictional boundaries of the State of Maryland" and

7

"subsequently altered the GPS location of the stop to indicate that it occurred within Prince George's County, Maryland. [Appellant's] conduct brought himself and the Department into disrepute."

In Count 4 (Failure to Follow Traffic Stop Procedure), MSP alleged that "[p]rior to the stop and before contact with [the driver], [appellant] failed to call out the location, description of the vehicle and number of occupants in violation of MSP traffic stop policy and procedures."

The Board Hearing

The Board held a three-day hearing beginning on January 25, 2022.^[4] Appellant pleaded guilty to Count 4 and not guilty to the remaining counts. As to the two counts of false report (Counts 1 and 2), the MSP Personnel Directive 17.03.04(N)(5) provided that:

All reports submitted by MSP employees will be truthful; no employee will knowingly report or cause to be reported any false information. A clear distinction must be made between reports which contain false information and those which contain inaccurate or improper information. To prove by a preponderance of evidence that one has submitted a false report, evidence must be presented for consideration that such report was designedly untrue, deceitful or made with the intent to deceive the person to whom it was directed.

As to the third count for unbecoming conduct, the MSP Personnel Directive 17.03.04(C)(1) provided that:

Every employee will conduct himself, both on and off-duty, in a manner which reflects most favorably on the MSP. The phrase "reflect most favorably" pertains to the perceptions of both citizens and other MSP

8

employees. Conduct unbecoming of an employee will include that which tends to bring the MSP into disrepute, discredits the employee as a representative of the MSP or tends to impair the operation or efficiency of the MSP or employee.

During the hearing, the Board listened to appellant's testimony and that of other witnesses. It also admitted several items of evidence such as Google maps of the relevant area, the incident report, CAD detail reports, appellant's in-car video of the traffic stop, and an audio recording of appellant's interrogation. We summarize the evidence presented at the hearing that pertains to resolving the issues on appeal.

Maryland-D.C. Boundary Line

During the interrogation, Sergeant Phillips asked appellant about his familiarity with the D.C. boundary line. As for major venues around I-495 and I-295, appellant stated, "[T]here's MGM Casino, there's National Harbor. On the other side is Virginia, on the other side is DC[.]."

Appellant explained that during training, he was not given "strict guidance" on where the patrol area ends in relation to I-495. He was only trained to use the D.C. Water Plant as a landmark.^[5] "[I]f you reach by that wall, you are into DC." He was told that "if you reach by DC Water, that's the DC area, and a little past that is Exit 1, which you always take your turnaround" to return to Maryland. He had set an earlier landmark for himself "a good distance before the DC Water point," and about a...