Labor & Employment Law

Polygraph results justify rejecting applicant for appointment as a police officer

By Harvey Randall, Esq.

Polygraph results justify rejecting applicant for appointment as a police officer
Mullen v County of Suffolk, 43 A.D.3d 934, Appellate Division, Second Department

Thomas J. Mullen was a candidate to become a police officer in the Ocean Beach Police Department.

In order to qualify for the position, he had to pass a polygraph examination. Ocean Beach determined that the results of Mullen?s polygraph examination indicated that the he ?was deceptive in his response to questioning concerning his involvement with illegal drugs and narcotics.? As a result, Ocean Beach disqualified him from further consideration for employment as a police officer.

Mullen file an Article 78 petition challenging his disqualification. The Appellate Division remanded his petition to Supreme Court in order for Mullen to complete the administrative appeal process. That process involved forwarding his polygraph results to an independent police agency for verification.

Ultimately, Mullen?s polygraph test results were submitted to the Vermont State Police for verification. The independent review confirmed that Mullen was deceptive in his response to questioning concerning his involvement with illegal drugs and narcotics.

Again Mullen challenged his disqualification. This time the Appellate Division ruled that Ocean Beach ?did not act irrationally or arbitrarily in relying on the results of their own polygraph test as well as the review conducted by the Vermont State Police to determine that [Mullen] was not an appropriate candidate to be a law enforcement officer.?

The court pointed out that ?An appointing authority has wide discretion in determining the fitness of candidates . . . This discretion is particularly broad in the hiring of law enforcement officers, to whom high standards may be applied . . . As long as the administrative determination is not irrational or arbitrary, this Court will not interfere with it.?

[See, also, Mullen v County of Suffolk , 307 A.D.2d 1036]

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on April 23, 2008 (boomark / email).