Automatic Removal from Office

Pay attention, sleazebag public officials: before you take the deal next time ask yourself if you're pleading to something that involves "willful deceit or a calculated disregard for honest dealings."

HOLT DISMISSAL BECOMES LEGAL CHALLENGE:

Fuel for George A. Holt Jr.'s swift expulsion from office can be found in a 1993 court ruling that helps express why some taxpayers felt so angry when the Erie County legislator pleaded guilty to tax violations but then remained on the job.

"The public has a right to rest assured that its officers are individuals of moral integrity in whom they may, without second thought, place their confidence and trust," said New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, in Duffy v. Ward.

The justices found that a New York City police officer should not have lost his job when he followed a motorist into his home after an off-duty traffic dispute. Criminal trespass was not a charge that displayed a lack of integrity, so he had not violated his oath of office.

But the justices did set a recognized standard that, when breached, could automatically toss public officials from office for violating their oath. They said criminal convictions involving "willful deceit or a calculated disregard for honest dealings" were enough - felony or not.

County Attorney Laurence K. Rubin said he found too many similarities last week when he compared the text of the Duffy decision to Holt's crimes. To Rubin, it seemed that Holt served his last day as a legislator Jan. 8, the day he pleaded guilty to keeping $20,000 in sales taxes collected at his Buffalo restaurant. He admitted "willfully" filing two false sales tax reports from 2004.

"I thought I had to bring it to the attention of the Legislature because I thought it could impugn the integrity of the actions taken by Mr. Holt," Rubin said. He first told Legislature Chairwoman Lynn M. Marinelli of his suspicions Tuesday, and she alerted Holt to Rubin's research as a courtesy.

Holt's presence at any Legislature or committee meeting was enough to call any action into question if he created a quorum or cast a deciding vote. With a round of committee sessions set for Thursday, Rubin wanted to act quickly.

After 4 p.m. Wednesday, Rubin told Marinelli that indeed his research showed Holt "vacated" his Legislature seat by pleading guilty. Then, with a call from Marinelli, Holt learned that his 13-year career as a legislator had ended, assuming his lawyers cannot win back his job.
...
Democrats last week asked Rubin to assess whether the Republicans' proposal made legal sense. He soon found the Duffy v. Ward decision. He also found a state attorney general's opinion from 1997 upholding the removal of a state university trustee on an attempted larceny charge and an attorney general's opinion in 1999 agreeing that a Hudson Valley-area school board member lost her seat when convicted of petit larceny after illegally collecting unemployment insurance.

Rubin also found an Appellate Division case from 2000, Bowman v. Kerik, agreeing some New York City corrections officers did lose their jobs when pleading guilty to filing fraudulent state income tax returns. The bedrock for these cases was the state Public Officers Law and Duffy v. Ward.

Mr. Holt's attorneys disagree with the outcome, naturally.