1
Taxi Limousine Comm’n v. Jalloh
OATH Index No. 1301/08 (Feb. 5, 2008)
Evidence established that respondent, convicted of assault in the third degree and attempted assault in the second degree, lacked fitness to maintain for-hire vehicle driver’s license.
______
NEW YORK CITY OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIALS AND HEARINGS
In the Matter of
TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION
Petitioner
-against-
ABUBAKARR JALLOH
Respondent
______
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
KEVIN F. CASEY, Administrative Law Judge
Petitioner, the Taxi and Limousine Commission (“TLC”), brought this fitness proceeding against respondent Abubakarr Jalloh, a licensed driver of for-hire vehicles, under its rules and New York City’s Administrative Code. 35 RCNY § 8-15(a); Admin. Code § 19-512.1. Based upon respondent’s recent criminal convictions for assault in the third degree, a violation of Penal Law section 120.00, and attempted assault in the second degree, a violation of Penal Law sections110.00 and 120.05, petitioner contends that respondent no longer meets the requirements for licensure (Pet. Exs. 1 3).
At the hearing on January 11, 2008, petitioner relied upon documentary evidence. Respondent testified in his own behalf.
For the reasons below, I find that petitioner proved that respondent no longer meets the qualifications for licensure and recommend revocation of his license to operate for-hire vehicles.
ANALYSIS
Petitioner issued respondent a license to operate for-hire vehicles in 2005 (Pet. Ex. 5). On March 1, 2006, respondent was arrested in the Bronx following an altercation with several TLC inspectors (Pet. Exs. 1 2). Petitioner presented a preliminary unusual incident report describing the incident. Two TLC officers saw respondent driving a for-hire vehicle and picking up passengers, as if he was operating a taxi. When respondent drove through a red light, the officers stopped the car. Respondent was uncooperative and refused to present his credentials. He got out of the vehicle and banged an open door against one of the officers. He then threw a cinder block at the officer. When the officer used pepper spray to defend himself, respondent fled the scene on foot. Minutes later, he returned with rocks in his hands and he punched an officer in the face. TLC officers and police officers subdued respondent. Three officers suffered injuries: one injured his shoulder, had a bite on the forearm, and was punched in the face; another injured his hand and wrist; the third sustained a bruised knee. Respondent was treated at a hospital for scrapes on his knees and eye irritation (Pet. Ex. 2).
Based upon this incident, respondent was arrested and he eventually pled guilty on April 26, 2007, to assault in the third degree, a class A misdemeanor (Pet. Ex. 1). He was later sentenced to three years’ probation (Pet. Ex. 1).
On October 3, 2006, respondent was arrested in Manhattan after another altercation with TLC officers (Pet. Exs. 3 4). According to the felony complaint, respondent stopped to pick up two TLC officers who hailed his for-hire vehicle at 94th Street and 1st Avenue. When the officers identified themselves, respondent drove away at a high rate of speed, causing an open rear door of the car to strike one of the officers, injuring her shoulder. Respondent’s vehicle struck another car and one of the officers, injuring his elbow. Two other officers were injured while attempting to subdue respondent (Pet. Ex. 4). Respondent was indicted and charged with resisting arrest, reckless endangerment, and assault (Pet. Ex. 4).
On March 22, 2007, respondent pleaded guilty to attempted assault in the second degree, a class E felony (Pet. Ex. 3). He was later sentenced to five years’ probation for this incident (Pet. Ex. 3).
Petitioner alleged that respondent lacks the fitness to maintain a for-hire vehicle driver’s license in light of the disposition of his criminal cases. 35 RCNY § 8-15(a). The Commission “may, for good cause shown relating to a threat to the public health, or safety” suspend a taxicab or for-hire vehicle license, and, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, “revoke such license.” Admin. Code § 19-512.1; Taxi & Limousine Comm’n v. Dutan, OATH Index No. 1113/08, at 4 (Dec. 21, 2007). Because ensuring the safety of passengers and the public is of paramount concern to the Commission, it may hold its licensees to high standards of safe driving and good judgment. Taxi & Limousine Comm’n v. Gurevich, OATH Index No. 299/08, at 2 (Sept. 4, 2007).
By his guilty pleas, respondent admitted serious wrongdoing that showed a disregard for others. He committed his crimes against TLC officers who were investigating him for rules violations. Although respondent denied all the charges at the hearing, his testimony was vague and unpersuasive. He claimed that all the officers in both incidents were lying (Tr. 20-21). For the first incident, he insisted that the officers hit him without any justification and that he hit no one (Tr. 17-18). For the second incident, respondent testified that officers broke his window and pulled him from the vehicle (Tr. 19).
Respondent offered no credible evidence to support his dubious claim that several TLC officers conspired against him on two different occasions. Moreover, the numerous injuries sustained by the officers undercut respondent’s suggestion that he did not use any force. Finally, respondent’s testimony directly contradicted his own guilty pleas, where he admitted to committing an assault and an attempted assault. Although respondent now claims that he only pleaded guilty to avoid jail, he never sought to vacate either conviction and he did not offer any reliable evidence to challenge their validity.
Petitioner proved its case by a preponderance of the evidence. Respondent lacks fitness to drive for-hire vehicles because his crimes show that he poses a threat to the public. Admin. Code § 19-512.1; see Taxi & Limousine Commission v. Khan, OATH Index No. 333/99 (Dec. 14, 1998) (assaults of Port Authority police officers demonstrated that driver posed a threat to the public); see also Taxi & Limousine Comm’n v. Chaudry, OATH Index No. 387/96, at 6-7 (May 2, 1996) (public safety considerations demanded revocation of license where driver’s beating of a passenger resulted in conviction for assault); Taxi & Limousine Comm’n v. Rubinov, OATH Index No. 451/08, at 3 (Oct. 12, 2007) (conviction for criminal possession of a weapon raised public safety concerns).
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1.Petitioner proved that respondent poses a risk to public safety.
2.Respondent is unfit to maintain a license to drive for-hire vehicles.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend a finding that respondent is unfit to maintain his license to drive for-hire vehicles and, thus, his license should be revoked.
Kevin F. Casey
Administrative Law Judge
February 5, 2008
SUBMITTED TO:
MATTHEW W. DAUS
Commissioner
APPEARANCES:
MARC T. HARDEKOPF, ESQ.
Attorney for Petitioner
GAIL ELLINGTON, ESQ.