Three Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission employees arrested on charges of official misconduct February 1, 2011
Posted by jefhenninger in News.Tags: official misconduct
add a comment
Three Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission employees were arrested today on charges of official misconduct as part of an ongoing probe into the troubled agency. Arrested were Anthony Ardis, 56, of Paterson, a former PVSC Commissioner who currently is Clerk to the Board of Commissioners and Director of Management Services at the PVSC; Kevin Keogh, 45, of Roseland, Superintendent for Special Services at the PVSC; and Chester Mazza, 69, of Totowa, Assistant Superintendent for Special Services.
Each was charged with official misconduct. The defendants will be held at Passaic County Jail, with bail for each set at $75,000. According to the complaint, each was hit with charges that they directed subordinate employees to complete repairs or improvements at their private homes or the homes of people close to them while the employees were on agency time.
According to the complaint, on several occasions Ardis allegedly sent PVSC employees to his mother’s home to tear down sheet rock in her garage and do other home maintenance work. On another occasion, Ardis sent PVSC workers to his girlfriend’s home to replace two air-conditioning units. According to the Star Ledger, Ardis serves as the agency’s ethics officer and is a former district director for U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell.
The complaint alleges that Keogh sent workers to his home on several occasions to do deck work, remove old windows and install replacements and cut, finish and install kitchen cabinet doors. Mazza is alleged to have sent PVSC employees to his home twice, once to install a roof vent and a second time to repair an outside wall.
Official misconduct carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in state prison. For each defendant, the conduct is alleged to have occurred after April 14, 2007, when enhanced penalties for official misconduct took effect. As a result, each defendant would face a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison without possibility of parole if convicted. In other words, these crimes have become very serious and the mandatory terms present problems for criminal defense attorneys.
The agency has been under fire daily over the past two weeks as Gov. Chris Christie ordered the removal of six of seven commissioners last week. Christie was responding to an expose by the Star Ledger that detailed several abuses including hiring of several family members by the sitting commissioners. All six resigned late last week. Last year, Christie replaced the agency’s director with former prosecutor Wayne Forrest. Earlier this week, Forrest cut the salaries of every employee making over $100,000.
Bay Head police chief relieved of duty while investigation continues January 17, 2011
Posted by jefhenninger in News.Tags: official misconduct, theft by deception
add a comment
Police Chief Charles Grace Jr., 50, of the Bay Head Police Department was relieved of duty Saturday by Ocean County Prosecutor Marlene Lynch Ford as part of an ongoing investigation. Deputy Chief Michael Mohel of the Prosecutor’s Office said Grace was charged in a complaint filed by Detective Ray Gardner, also of the Prosecutor’s Office. The complaint stated that in an investigation beginning April 10, 2007, Grace unlawfully took more than $500 in money belonging with Bay Head-Mantoloking Police Benevolent Association. Mohel has been named acting chief of police by Ford until the Borough Council can take action. The State has not revealed the exact amount of money allegedly taken. No word on when Grace was notified of the investigation or whether Grace has an attorney.
Grace was chief of police since 2005 and was president of the Ocean County Chiefs of Police Association in 2010. Mohel said day-to-day operations of the department will be handled by Bay Head police officers Lt. Robert Hoffman, Sgt. First Class Geoffrey Barger and Sgt. William Hoffman, who have all been with the department for more than 20 years. When a chief police administrator is removed from position in a town, Mohel said the prosecutor appoints someone to temporary command until the Borough Council can take further action, which should occur within about three weeks.
Story is here.
New Jersey Official Misconduct Lawyer October 29, 2010
Posted by jefhenninger in News.Tags: official misconduct
add a comment
New Jersey Official Misconduct Lawyer
A suspended Camden Police officer from Monroe Township was indicted by a grand jury in Camden County on charges of official misconduct and falsifying or tampering with records. Shane Sampson of Williamstown, was indicted on one count of 2nd degree official misconduct and one count of 4th degree falsifying or tampering with records. Sampson was originally charged and arrested in April 2010 and was released on his own recognizance.
He is accused of abusing his position as a police officer by signing a complaint with the Camden Police Department on Dec. 23, 2009, that led to his ex-wife’s arrest for interference with custody. She was in Florida with their toddler-aged daughter at the time the warrant was issued. A court-ordered custody agreement permitted her to take their daughter to Florida until Dec. 22. But she had allegedly informed Sampson that due to an injury she sustained while away, she would not be able to return to New Jersey until Dec. 28.
Interference with custody matters are typically addressed in Family Court, or on rare occasions, with a summons to appear in criminal court. It is alleged it was improper for Sampson to seek an arrest warrant in this matter. In addition, neither Sampson nor his wife lived in Camden. The Camden Police Department had no jurisdiction over the charge filed by Sampson. Sampson personally travelled to the Atlantic City Airport to ensure that his ex-wife was detained by New Jersey State Police on Dec. 28 as she disembarked from a plane with her young child. She was then arrested and transferred to the Camden Police Department. In total, she was in custody approximately eight hours before being released. The Camden County Prosecutor’s Office later reviewed the complaint signed by Sampson and dismissed the charges as unfounded.
Sampson’s ex-wife signed a complaint with the Internal Affairs Unit of the Camden Police Department shortly after the incident. Sampson has been suspended without pay from the city police force pending the outcome of the case.
Story is here.
NJ rail conductor admits illegally selling tickets August 7, 2010
Posted by jefhenninger in News.Tags: official misconduct
add a comment
Terance Campbell of Rahway, a former New Jersey Transit rail conductor has admitted stealing from his employer by selling bundles of train tickets and keeping the cash. On Friday, he pleaded guilty to official misconduct charges. The Essex County Prosecutor’s Office will ask for an 18-month prison sentence.
Story is here.
NJ detective accused of exposing himself to girl via webcam May 11, 2010
Posted by jefhenninger in News.Tags: official misconduct
add a comment
Madison, NJ Detective James N. Haspel, of Chatham, was arrested by state police on his way to work Tuesday and charged with second-degree official misconduct, attempting to endanger the welfare of a child, and attempting to transmit obscene materials to a person under 16 years old for allegedly exposing himself via webcam to an undercover detective he believed was a 13-year-old girl and using a computer at police headquarters to communicate with the person he thought was the girl.
The complaint alleges that between December 2009 and May 2010, Haspel transmitted webcam videos of himself with his genitals exposed to a person he believed to be a 13-year-old girl who was actually an undercover detective. He is charged with official misconduct because he allegedly sent the videos from a hotel in Columbus, Ohio, where he was attending a training conference for the police department, and because he allegedly communicated with the “girl” while on duty at police headquarters using a computer supplied by the borough for official police business.
Story is here.
Third Degree Official Misconduct is Only an Exception April 4, 2010
Posted by jefhenninger in Articles.Tags: official misconduct
add a comment
In State v. Phelps, 187 N.J. Super. 364, 375 (App. Div. 1983), aff’d, 96 N.J. 500 (1984), the Appellate Divsion held that official misconduct is a crime of the second degree and that, rather than forming a substantive element of the offense, the part of the statute that reads:
“any offense proscribed by this section is a crime of the second degree. If the benefit offered, conferred, agreed to be conferred, solicited, accepted or agreed to be accepted is of the value of $200.00 or less, any offense proscribed by this section is a crime of the third degree”
“carves out an exception” where the benefit obtained or sought to be obtained is of a value of $200 or less. Id. at 373-74. The Phelps Court found that the Legislature intended for courts construing the official misconduct statute to “start from the premise that the offense is of the second degree.” Id. at 375. The carved out exception “is clearly pecuniary in nature” and did not apply to “a benefit not subject to pecuniary measurement.” Ibid. Applying this same reasoning, the Appellate Division has also affirmed a conviction for second-degree official misconduct of a volunteer firefighter who repeatedly called in false fire alarms in order to experience the joy of responding to them and possibly to give the volunteer fire department enough work to justify its existence, holding that “[b]ecause there was no pecuniary benefit, the misconduct was second degree.” State v. Quezada, 402 N.J. Super. 277, 286 (App. Div. 2008).
Official Misconduct Must Somehow Relate to the Defendant’s Public Office April 4, 2010
Posted by jefhenninger in Articles.Tags: official misconduct
add a comment
Official Misconduct has become a very popular crime over the last decade. With NJ’s economy further falling into the abyss, the public will demand that public officials be prosecuted and law enforcement, always ready to make headlines, will look for utilize this statute any chance they get. With that desire however, comes over reaching. There have been several cases where the State has charged official misconduct only to have the court throw it out.
When confronted with an official misconduct charge, a defense lawyer must assume the facts are true (for now) in order to make sure that the charge is proper.
The 2009 case of State v. Kueny is a great example of what happens when the State goes too far and how to analyze these cases.
a. He commits an act relating to his office but constituting an unauthorized exercise of his official functions, knowing that such act is unauthorized or he is committing such act in an unauthorized manner; or
The defendant’s oath as a police officer to defend and obey the laws of New Jersey, in of itself, does not make him strictly liable for official misconduct for all crimes he may commit. The Supreme Court has stated that, although the oath of office “is a necessary condition to assumption of office, of itself it creates no particular duty, transgression of which” would be indictable. See State v. Silverstein, 41 N.J. 203, 205 (1963). Nor was there introduced into evidence any statute, Mount Laurel Police Department standard operating procedure, order, rule or regulation which prescribed that a police officer had a duty to return lost money that is discovered while the officer is off-duty, on vacation or outside of Mount Laurel. In New Jersey “‘the fundamental duty of a policeman . . . is to be on the lookout for infractions of the law and to use due diligence in discovering and reporting them.'” Ballinger v. Del. River Port Auth., 172 N.J. 586, 604 (2002) (quoting City of Asbury Park v. Dep’t of Civil Serv., 17 N.J. 419, 429 (1955) (brackets omitted)). However, as a rule “a governing body can directly exercise its police power only within its jurisdictional boundaries, absent a statute broadening those powers.” State v. Cohen, 73 N.J. 331, 342 (1977).
The jurisdiction of officers of New Jersey municipal police departments is generally limited to “within the territorial limits” of their municipalities. N.J.S.A. 40A:14-152. An exception to this rule is that a municipal police officer has “full power of arrest for any crime committed in said officer’s presence and committed anywhere within the territorial limits of the State of New Jersey.” N.J.S.A. 40A:14-152.1. See State v. White, 305 N.J. Super. 322, 327 (App. Div. 1997); State v. Montalvo, 280 N.J. Super. 377, 381 (App. Div. 1995); see also Barna v. City of Perth Amboy, 42 F.3d 809, 817 (3d Cir. 1994).
Subsection b, the “omission to act” phase of this offense, has reference to a public servant who consciously refrains from performing an official non-discretionary duty, which duty is imposed upon him by law or which is clearly inherent in the nature of his office. In addition, the public servant must know of the existence of such non-discretionary duty to act. Thus, such duty must be either one that is imposed by law, or one that is unmistakably inherent in the nature of the public servant’s office, i.e., the duty to act is so clear that the public servant is on notice as to the standards that he must meet. In other words, the failure to act must be more than a mere breach of good judgment. In the absence of a duty to act, there can be no conviction.
[II Final Report of the New Jersey Law Revision Commission, Commentary 291 (1971).]
The proposition that it is an inherent duty of every police officer to obey the law, and therefore police officers are strictly liable under
Stated differently, the misconduct must somehow relate to the wrongdoer’s public office. There must be a relationship between the misconduct and public office of the wrongdoer, and the wrongdoer must rely upon his or her status as a public official to gain a benefit or deprive another. State v. Corso, 355 N.J. Super. 518, 526 (App. Div. 2002) (off duty officer has a duty to arrest persons committing a crime in the officer’s presence; conviction upheld), certif. denied, 175 N.J. 547 (2003). See also State v. Bullock, 136 N.J. 149, 157 (1994) (suspended officer displayed State Police identification card to his victims; conduct sufficiently related to office to constitute misconduct); State v. Mason, supra, 355 N.J. Super. at 305 (dismissal of misconduct count affirmed; defendants were private citizens performing services pursuant to government contracts); Cannel, New Jersey Criminal Code Annotated, comment 4 on N.J.S.A. 2C:30-2 (collecting cases).
Ex-Franklin Twp. housing official admits steering contracts to husband’s business February 17, 2010
Posted by jefhenninger in News.Tags: official misconduct
add a comment
April Harbstreeet, who previously administered the Franklin Township Community Development Block Grant Program has entered a guilty plea today in Somerset County Superior Court. She was responsible for qualifying applicants for federal housing assistance and soliciting bids for housing rehabilitation projects. In 2005, she contracted $113,677 worth of work to her husband’s company, Ronald Patrick Plumbing. After her supervisors told her to stop, her husband Ronald DeSantis,42, continued to win contracts by working under the name of an electrical contractor, and reaped $169,678.78.
Today, both pleaded guilty to multiple offenses, including 13 counts of second-degree official misconduct and third-degree witness tampering. DeSantis also pleaded guilty under a separate indictment to third-degree tax charges, including failure to file income tax returns.
Under the deal Harbstreet will be sentenced to five years in prison. As a condition of the plea, she was remanded to the county jail pending sentence. DeSantis will be sentenced to serve seven years in prison, but he won’t be sentenced until Harbstreet is released, for the benefit of their child. He also agreed to pay back taxes, interest and penalties which equals $23,479.99.
Story is here.
Essex County’s election superintendent charged with official misconduct January 8, 2010
Posted by jefhenninger in News.Tags: official misconduct
add a comment
Carmine Casciano of West Caldwell has been charged with official misconduct. He is accused of giving unauthorized paid days off to employees who worked on political campaigns. In addition, he is also alleged to have ordered destruction of records related to the scheme.
Seems like someone flipped. His attorney needs to act fast to see who is on board and who’s not. This is an interesting case because he did not profit off of this like most people charged with official misconduct. The State will need some good witnesses to link all of this together.
Story is here.