Daniel Spagnuolo, CSC Docket No. 2025-1606

BackgroundThe appeal of Daniel Spagnuolo, Police Officer, Lakewood, Police Department, removal, effective January 27, 2025, on charges, was heard by Administrative Law Judge Nicole T. Minutoli, who rendered her initial decision on October 24, 2025. Exceptions were filed on behalf of the appellant and a reply was filed on behalf of the appointing authority.

AnalysisHaving considered the record and the ALJ’s initial decision, including a thorough review of the exceptions, and having made an independent evaluation of the record, the Civil Service Commission (Commission), at its meeting of November 26, 2023, accepted and adopted the Findings of Fact and Conclusion as contained in the attached ALJ’s initial decision and her recommendation to uphold the removal.

As indicated above, the Commission thoroughly reviewed the exceptions filed in this matter. Upon that review, it finds that those filings do not persuade the Commission that the ALJ’s findings and conclusions, or her recommendation to uphold the removal were arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable. Accordingly, it upholds those actions for the reasons expressed by the ALJ. It makes only the following comments regarding the penalty.

In addition to its consideration of the seriousness of the underlying incident in determining the proper penalty, the Commission also utilizes, when appropriate, the concept of progressive discipline. West New York v. Bock, 38 N.J. 500 (1962). In determining the propriety of the penalty, several factors must be considered, including the nature of the appellant’s offense, the concept of progressive discipline, and the employee’s prior record. George v. North Princeton Developmental Center, 96 N.J.A.R. 2d (CSV) 463. However, it is well established that where the underlying conduct is of an egregious nature, the imposition of a penalty up to and including removal is appropriate, regardless of an individual’s disciplinary history. See Henry v. Rahway State Prison, 81 N.J. 571 (1980). It is settled that the theory of progressive discipline is not a “fixed and immutable rule to be followed without question.” Rather, it is recognized that some disciplinary infractions are so serious that removal is appropriate notwithstanding a largely unblemished prior record. See Carter v. Bordentown, 191 N.J. 474 (2007). In this regard, the Commission emphasizes that a Police Officer is a law enforcement officer who, by the very nature of his job duties, is held to a higher standard of conduct than other public employees. See Moorestown v. Armstrong, 89 N.J. Super. 560 (App. Div. 1965), cert. denied, 47 N.J. 80 (1966). See also, In re Phillips, 117 N.J. 567 (1990). Moreover, even when a Police Officer does not possess a prior disciplinary record after many unblemished years of employment, the seriousness of an offense such as in this matter may, nevertheless, warrant the penalty of removal.

Administrative Law JudgeRegarding the penalty, the ALJ found that:

Spagnuolo is not an ordinary citizen. He volunteered to be trained as a police officer and serve the public. He agreed to the rules and regulations of the Lakewood Township Police Department. Spagnuolo was not only untruthful but also deceitful. Spagnuolo’s reasons for lying, while compassionate in trying to protect his father, do not excuse his actions. As a sworn officer, he was entrusted with upholding the law and maintaining public trust. By choosing deception over integrity, he compromised that trust and undermined the standards expected of law enforcement. His conduct was egregious enough to warrant his removal.

AnalysisI therefore CONCLUDE that removal is the appropriate penalty.

The Commission wholeheartedly agrees with the above assessment and finds that removal from employment is neither disproportionate to the offense nor shocking to the conscious.

ORDER

The Civil Service Commission finds that the action of the appointing authority in removing the appellant was justified. The Commission therefore affirms that action and dismisses the appeal of Daniel Spagnuolo.

ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.