Stein v. Maine Criminal Justice Academy
95 A.3d 612
Me.2014Background
- Stein worked as a corrections officer at Cumberland County Jail for about 12 years before the incident.
- On June 17, 2011, Stein assisted with removing a suicidal inmate from a pod during an overtime shift.
- An inmate on the second-floor tier escalated, threatened suicide, and jumped to the ground; Stein dragged the injured inmate toward medical after the fall.
- The inmate suffered two broken ankles and other injuries; Stein did not call medical help immediately and dragged the inmate 127 feet over 46 seconds, with the inmate’s pants partly exposed.
- Stein’s employment was terminated; he was charged with assault, and the Board voted to revoke his certificate in 2011, later suspended proceedings after a hearing.
- A two-day hearing in 2012 led to a Recommended Decision that Stein had committed assault, with a suggestion for a one-year suspension, which the Board adopted in 2012.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Stein’s state of mind adequately proven for assault? | Stein argues he acted in shock and did not consciously disregard risk. | Board contends record shows conscious disregard and a gross deviation. | Sufficient evidence supports reckless, conscious disregard. |
| Did Stein cause bodily injury or offensive physical contact? | Injury causation unclear; abrasions may be prior or incidental. | Offensive contact established; bodily injury shown by pain and injuries. | Offensive physical contact established; bodily injury also supported by pain. |
| Was the Board’s ultimate disciplinary decision within its discretion? | One-year suspension too lenient or inconsistent with others' actions. | Board acted within discretion; disciplinary choices reasonable given record. | Board’s one-year suspension not an abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Goodall, 407 A.2d 268 (Me. 1979) (conscious disregard is a subjective state of mind)
- State v. Taylor, 661 A.2d 665 (Me. 1995) (fact-finder may infer state of mind from conduct)
- Seider v. Bd. of Exam’rs of Psychologists, 2000 ME 206 (Me. 2000) (sufficiency review for agency findings; use deference to record)
- Budzko v. One City Ctr. Assocs., 2001 ME 37 (Me. 2001) (whether conduct was a gross deviation is a question of fact)
- State v. Ledger, 599 A.2d 813 (Me. 1991) (gross deviation standard for reasonable conduct)
- State v. Gammon, 529 A.2d 813 (Me. 1987) (review of gross deviation and reckless conduct)
- State v. Perfetto, 424 A.2d 1095 (Me. 1981) (rational jury could find gross deviation from standard of conduct)
- Sager v. Town of Bowdoinham, 2004 ME 40 (Me. 2004) (abuse of discretion standard in administrative appeals)