Quaranta v. Jacobson

• Decision Date: 10 April 1996
• Citation: 641 N.Y.S.2d 1013,167 Misc.2d 1035
• Parties: In the Matter of John QUARANTA, Petitioner, v. Michael JACOBSON, as Acting Commissioner of the Department of Correction of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

Page 1013

641 N.Y.S.2d 1013

167 Misc.2d 1035

In the Matter of John QUARANTA, Petitioner, v. Michael JACOBSON, as Acting Commissioner of the Department of Correction of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court, New York County.

April 10, 1996.

O'Donnell, Schwartz, Glanstein & Rosen, New York City, for petitioner.

Paul A. Crotty, Corporation Counsel of New York City (Georgia Pestana, of counsel), for respondents.

EDWARD H. LEHNER, Justice.

In this CPLR article 78 proceeding, petitioner seeks a judgment annulling the determination of the Commissioner of the Department of Correction (the "Commissioner") denying petitioner an administrative hearing and terminating his employment. Respondents have cross-moved to dismiss the petition pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) and 7804(f) on the basis that petitioner was properly terminated under Public Officers Law § 30(1)(e).

Petitioner, a tenured correction officer with the New York City Department of Correction, was arrested in New Jersey in January 1993 and charged with burglary, possession of a weapon and possession of burglar's tools. He entered a guilty plea to the charge of possession of a weapon (his off-duty firearm), which is classified as a third degree crime in New Jersey, and was sentenced to one year's probation. Apparently, the other charges were dismissed. Thereafter, petitioner sought to withdraw the guilty plea and he has filed an appeal with respect thereto which was pending at the time of argument of this motion.

Petitioner alleges that he was advised by his probation officer to provide her with a resignation letter which would be kept in his file pending the outcome of the appeal. However, he claims that the resignation letter was improperly given to and accepted by the Department of Correction.

Upon petitioner's conviction and sentencing in New Jersey, the Commissioner scheduled a disciplinary hearing pursuant to Civil Service Law § 75, but subsequently cancelled the hearing and terminated petitioner, allegedly on the basis of his resignation letter.

Respondents contend that petitioner was properly denied a hearing and terminated pursuant to Public Officers Law § 30(1)(e), which provides that a public office shall be vacant upon the incumbent's "conviction of a felony, or a crime involving a violation of his oath of office". Respondents argue that petitioner's conviction constituted a felony because New York Penal Law § 10.00(5) defines a felony as "an offense for which a sentence to a term of imprisonment in excess of one year may be imposed", and under New Jersey law a person convicted of a crime in the third degree "may be sentenced to imprisonment ... for a specific term of years which shall be fixed by the court and shall be between three years and five years" [N.J.S.A. § 2C:43-6(a)(3) ]. Therefore, respondents maintain that based upon the sentencing parameters in New Jersey for a third degree crime, petitioner was convicted of the equivalent to a felony in New York, which thus authorized his termination without a hearing. Respondents also contend that the Commissioner was authorized to terminate petitioner because his conviction constituted a "violation of his oath of office".

Petitioner counters that his conviction was not equivalent to a felony in New York because he was sentenced to one year of probation pursuant to N.J.S.A. § 2C:44-1(e), which directs the court not to impose a sentence of imprisonment where the defendant is a first-time offender of a third degree offense unless the court finds that imprisonment "is necessary for the protection of the public".

It has been determined that the crime of which a public official is convicted in another state need not be one which would constitute a felony under New York law in order for it to be deemed the "conviction of a felony" under Public Officers Law § 30(1)(e). In Graham v. Coughlin, 135 A.D.2d 1014, 522 N.Y.S.2d 738 (3d Dep't 1987), aff'd, 72 N.Y.2d 1014, 534 N.Y.S.2d 919, 531 N.E.2d 640 (1988), a determination that a correction officer was properly terminated based upon his conviction of a federal felony was upheld, the court finding that there was no requirement that the conviction constitute a felony under New York law, concluding (135 A.D.2d at p. 1015, 522 N.Y.S.2d 738):

"Similar language contained in Judiciary Law former § 90 was construed by the Court of Appeals as requiring the automatic disbarment of an attorney upon conviction of a Federal felony despite the fact that there was no State statute matching the Federal felony * * * Although the Judiciary Law was subsequently amended by the Legislature to include only convictions which would constitute felonies under the laws of New York (L.1979, ch. 674), the Legislature has not similarly amended the Public Officers Law. Consequently, there is no reason to read such a limitation into Public Officers Law § 30(1)(e)". (Citations omitted.)

Although there was a strong dissent to the foregoing determination upon its affirmance by the Court of Appeals (including a recommendation for a legislative change), the holding in that case results in a conclusion that petitioner's termination could properly be based upon a conviction of a crime which is a felony under the laws of another state, but not so classified under the New York Penal Law.

Here, the crime of which petitioner was convicted is not defined as a felony under either New Jersey or New York law. The New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice classifies crimes by degree: first, second, third and fourth [N.J.S.A. § 2C:43-1(a) ]. The New Jersey "criminal code does not use the word 'felony' " [State v....