STATE OF NEW MEXICO COUNTY OF BERNALILLO SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT JOHN CORVINO, Plaintiff, No.: v. THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE ex rel THE ALBUQUERQUE POLICE DEPARTMENT, GORDEN EDEN, Jr., JOSEPH WOLF, and MICHAEL ARCHIBEQUE (in his official and individual capacity), Defendants.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT VIOLATIONS,

PRIMA FACIE TORT, AND EMOTIONAL PAIN AND SUFFERING

I. CONCISE STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Plaintiff John Corvino (Corvino) is a thirty-year veteran police officer with over

twenty-five years as an officer of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD). With decades of

service as an experienced patrol officer, Corvino retired from APD in December, 2005

whereafter he was rehired by APD in January 2007 and assigned to the departments police

academyspecifically its Advanced and Basic Training Units. While assigned to such units,

Corvino provided thousands of hours of instruction to hundreds of APD cadets, APD officers,

and to personnel from other law enforcement agencies from across the county. As a police

instructor, Corvino holds numerous New Mexico Department of Public Safety (NMDPS)

certifications to teach police cadets and police officers specialized and high risk subject matter

including Use of Force, Verbal Defense and Influence, and Emergency Vehicle Operations.

FILED IN MY OFFICEDISTRICT COURT CLERK

5/7/2015 11:16:28 AMJames A. NoelPatricia Serna

D-202-CV-2015-03865

Page 2 of 17

Corvino also holds NMDPS Master Instructor Certification to teach Basic Police Instructor

Training and Intermediate Force Instructor Training (defensive tactics). Unlike basic or

specialized certification, Master Instructor certification authorizes Corvino to provide NMDPS

accredited instruction and to certify upcoming instructors.

As an APD Academy police instructor, Corvino was bound to follow and comply with

his departments Professional Accountability Bureau standard operating procedures and rules of

the New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) concerning such police instruction. Such

requirements include being the departments lead instructor in specialized matters, maintaining

and updating training records, and ensuring compliance with NMDPS requirements. In October

2013, while the Academy operated at the direction of its civilian director, Joseph Wolf, and its

sworn officer commander, Lieutenant Michael Archibeque, nearly two-dozen officers attended

two separate defensive tactics instructor certification classes to wit Intermediate Force

Instructor Certification and Ground Control Instructor Certification at the academy. At

Defendant Archibeques direction, these classes were held as instructor classes whereafter

graduates would be NMDPS certified instructors authorized to teach defensive tactics to students

including APD police cadets. In order for the classes to be accredited whereby graduates

received valid instructor certifications, pursuant to the rules of the NMAC governing such

classes, only instructors certified as defensive tactics Master Instructors could teach such classes.

Instead of having Corvino teach the classes, who is certified as a Master Instructor in defensive

tactics, Wolf and Archibeque brought in personnel from outside APDs academy who were not

certified Master Instructors in any police training subject matter.

Upon learning of this deficiency in the instructors qualification, and thereby in violation

of NMAC rules, Corvino informed Archibeque, Wolf, and personnel at the New Mexico Law

Page 3 of 17

Enforcement Academy (NMLEA) that because the courses were not compliant with the

NMAC, none of the graduates certificates were valid. Despite Corvinos obligations as a police

officer to uphold the law, and his assignment related responsibilities to ensure proper compliance

with APD procedures and NMAC rules, Corvino was told by at least Wolf and Archibeque to

cease all contact with NMLEA personnel and was further told that there was no defect in the

October classes or their graduates. Additionally, Corvino was then presented a letter to sign,

fabricated by Wolf (but in Corvinos name), that falsely stated Corvino provided oversight of the

October classes and that they complied with NMDPS requirements. Corvino refused to sign the

letter. Recognizing that failing to correct the invalid instructor certifications posed to invalidate

the instruction of police cadets and other students, Corvino informed and communicated with

NMLEA personnel of Archibeque and Wolfs actions in personal conversations and written

documents.

In response to Corvino contacting NMLEA personnel concerning the actions and

inactions of Archibeque and Wolf, Archibeque spoke with APD Deputy Chief William Roseman

who advised Archibeque to initiate an APD Internal Affairs unit (IA) investigation of Corvino,

which Archibeque did. In the months following Archibeques contact with IA, Corvino was

ostracized and excluded from social and professional activities at the Academy and, among other

retaliatory actions, barred from providing instruction to police cadets. With IA concluding the

investigation of Corvino in July 2014, APD Chief Gorden Eden imposed an eighty-hour unpaid

suspension as final discipline upon Corvino because of his alleged violations of APD procedures

which included insubordination, bringing the department into disrepute, and releasing

confidential department material.

Page 4 of 17

In fact, during a period whereby the United States Department of Justice was

investigating APD and its officers for a pattern and practice of excessive force, Corvino sought

to intervene to correct invalid training and certification in order to keep the department from

disrepute and further harm. As a consequence of his efforts to ensure defensive tactics training

was compliant with state rules, and thus the instructors certification to teach and cadets

certifications as police officers valid, Eden, Wolf, and Archibeque retaliated against Corvino by

adversely affecting his employment by suspending him without pay, making his working

conditions unenjoyable and intolerable, and subjecting him to emotional harm and mental

anguish. Eden, Wolf, and Archibeque additionally failed to remedy the invalid certifications for

instructors who, upon information and belief, continue to teach defensive tactics instruction to

cadets to this day. Additionally, the of the validity of as many as one-hundred police officers

certifications remain in question and in doubt because of the invalid training provided to them.

Corvino brings this complaint under NMSA 1978, 10-16C-1 et seq, the Whistleblower

Protection Act, and New Mexico common law for damages resulting from the illegal retaliation

against him for engaging in protected activities while employed by the City of Albuquerque.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Jurisdiction and venue are proper in state court pursuant to NMSA 1978, 10-16C-4. All of

the parties reside in New Mexico and the acts and inactions complained of occurred in

Bernalillo County and the State of New Mexico.

III. PARTIES 2. Plaintiff John Corvino (Corvino) was employed by the City of Albuquerque as a police

officer and was assigned positions at APDs Police Academy from January 2007 through

April 2015.

Page 5 of 17

3. Defendant City of Albuquerque is a municipality in the State of New Mexico and a public

employer.

4. Defendant Gorden Eden is employed by the City of Albuquerque as the chief of the

Albuquerque Police Department and was the departments highest ranking sworn police

officer during the period of the allegations contained herein.

5. Defendant Joseph Wolf was employed by the City of Albuquerque and was the civilian

Director of Training at the Albuquerque Police Department Police Academy and Corvinos

civilian supervisor during the period of the allegations contained herein.

6. Defendant Michael Archibeque is employed by the City of Albuquerque and is the sworn

police officer commander at the Albuquerque Police Department Police Academy Chief of

Staff overseeing Corvino during the period of the allegations contained herein.

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 7. Corvino re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations referenced as if set forth herein.

8. Corvino was hired by the City of Albuquerque and employed as an officer of the Albuquerque

Police Department in 1988 and retired as a police officer in December 2005. Corvino was an

APD Reserve Police Officer during his brief period of separation from the city after

retirement.

9. Corvino was rehired by the City of Albuquerque in January 2007 as a police officer whereby

he was assigned to APDs Police Academy and remained there until his resignation in April

2015.

10. Assigned to APDs Police Academy, Corvino held positions as an instructor in the

academys Basic Training Unit as well as its Advanced Training Unit. As an instructor in

those units, Corvino provided thousands of hours of instruction to department cadets, non-

Page 6 of 17

department cadets, and sworn law enforcement officers from APD as well as other in state

and out of state agencies.

11. Corvino holds NMDPS instructor certifications in general police instruction, use of force,

emergency vehicle operations, Taser, law enforcement fitness, and defensive tactics among

others. With these certifications Corvino is able to teach NMDPS accredited classes of those

and other subject matters to police cadets and police.

12. Corvino holds NMDPS Master Instructor certifications in Basic Police Instructor and

Intermediate Force Instructor subject matters. With these certifications Corvino is able to

teach NMDPS accredited classes to students who upon successful completion of the

instruction are approved and certified to teach classes of those subject matters to police

cadets and police officers.

13. Intermediate Force instruction is referred to generally as defensive tactics instruction and

is recognized by the NMLEA and 10.29.4.10(C)(1) NMAC as a high-risk subject matter of

instruction.

14. Defendant Wolf, upon information and belief, holds no NMLEA certifications to teach

police officers or police cadets any subject matter of instruction.

15. As Director of the APD Academy, Defendant Wolfs responsibilities were outlined in APD

standard operating procedures (SOP). Such responsibilities included:

A. Executive oversight of the Police Academy and Training staff and compliance with

Department Standard Operating Procedures, city personnel regulations, collective

bargaining agreements, and city, state, and federal laws and regulations.

Page 7 of 17

B. Liasion with the Department of Public Safety, regarding training

standards/requirements, and establishing and enforcing appropriate contracts and other

operating agreements.

C. Direction, quality, discipline and administrative control of all training staff; review and

approval of performance evaluations/feedback, commendations, and disciplinary

recommendations.

16. Defendant Archibeque holds several NMLEA certifications to teach police officers or police

cadets a variety of subject matter including firearms, use of force, and emergency vehicle

operations among other subject matter areas. Upon information and belief, Defendant

Archibeque has not led one class of instruction to any police cadets or police officers.

17. As the APD Academy Lieutenant, Defendant Archibeques responsibilities are outlined in

APD SOPs. Such responsibilities include:

A. Ensuring compliances with Standard Operating Procedures, city personnel regulations,

collective bargaining agreements, and city, state, and federal laws and regulations.

B. Assisting the Director of Training with liaison responsibilities with the Department of

Public Safety, regarding training standards and/or requirements.

C. Ensuring direction, quality, discipline and administrative control of all training staff;

review and approving performance evaluations/feedback, commendations, and

disciplinary recommendations.

D. Serve as the Police Academys principal subject-matter-expert (SME) on APD

organization and operations.

Page 8 of 17

18. The APD Police Academy is recognized as a NMLEA authorized satellite academy pursuant

to 10.29.5 et seq. NMAC and among its responsibilities is to provide basic training to APD

police cadets who upon successful graduation become APD police officers.

19. In October 2013, at the direction of Defendant Archibeque, two classes were held at APDs

Police Academy to increase the number of APDs defensive tactics instructors. From

October 7-11, 2013, sworn officers attended the Intermediate Force Instructor Certification

(IFIC) class, and from October 14-18, 2013, sworn officer attended the Ground Control

Instructor Certification (GCIC) class. Successful graduates of both courses desired to be

NMDPS certified defensive tactics instructors.

20. The primary and lead instructor for the two classes referenced in Paragraph 17 was Vicente

Alvarado. Mr. Alvarado is a former APD officer and does not possess a NMDPS Master

Instructor certification in any police training subject matter.

21. Alvarado had previously been denied issuance by NMDPS of Master Instructor certification

in defensive tactics as recently as August 3, 2011.

22. Under 10.29.4 et seq. NMAC, the rules by which personnel interested in becoming law

enforcement instructors may be certified by NMDPS as general instructors, specialized

instructors, and master instructors is defined. The NMDPS follows the higher education

model whereby general and specialized instructors receive their certifications to teach by

attending, and successfully completing, classes led and administered by NMDPS certified

master instructors.

23. As Alvarado was not a NMDPS certified Master Instructor in defensive tactics, all attendees

of both October 2013 classes were not in compliance with NMLEA and NMAC rules and as

such, all attendees who were issued certifications were issued certifications that were void.

Page 9 of 17

24. Upon information and belief Alvarado has previously provided invalid defensive tactics

instructor training to other APD personnel as early as April 1, 2011 when Alvarado did not

possess Master Instruction certification then either. Upon information and belief, such

personnel have thereafter provided invalid defensive tactics instruction to police cadets since

April 2011.

25. Upon information and belief, attendees of the two October 2013 classes have provided

defensive tactics instruction to police cadets and police officers. As the certifications of

these attendees are void, any such training rendered to other personnel is as a direct

consequence, also void.

26. Pursuant to NMLEA rules, police cadets must complete at least sixty-hours of defensive

tactics instruction as part of their basic police training program. Such instruction requires

cadets to be instructed and evaluated for proficiency by NMDPS certified defensive tactics

instructors.

26. Pursuant to 10.29.9.18(A) NMAC, only students who successfully complete a basic police

training program and have completed all requirements under the minimum standards of

training are allowed to take the New Mexico law enforcement officer certification exam.

27. Pursuant to 10.29.5 et seq.NMAC, the NMLEA has authority over the APD Police Academy

to ensure, among other things, its instructors and curriculum are accredited. Such

requirements concerning instructions includes that high risk instruction, such as defensive

tactics, must be instructed by personnel certified by NMDPS in those areas of instruction.

Furthermore, pursuant to 10.29.5.13 NMAC, the director of the NMLEA has direct

authority to monitor and evaluate the APD Police Academy and initiate decertification

proceedings.

Page 10 of 17

28. Upon information and belief, cadets from at least APDs 105-110 cadet classes who received

voided defensive tactics instruction have taken the New Mexico law enforcement officer

exam.

29. During the time APD IA was investigating Corvino for alleged SOP violations, and before

the filing of this complaint, Defendant Eden issued orders to APD employees forbidding

them from meeting with or communicating with United States Department of Justice

officials.

30. Since disciplining Corvino, Defendant Eden stated on about April 15, 2015, that his duty as

a police chief is to protect the person who came forward with that information to make sure

there is no retaliation regarding a cadet who alerted APD personnel of alleged misconduct

by an APD officer. With such a statement, Eden acknowledges and confirms that APD

personnel can be subject to retaliation and need protection.

31. Defendant Eden also said on about April 15, 2015, that referring investigations of

misconduct by APD personnel to outside agencies is, for the protection of whistleblowers

because such persons are less likely to face retaliation if the investigation is handled outside

of APD.

32. With respect to personnel who have alerted APD personnel of misconduct by other APD

personnel, Defendant Eden said on about April 14, 2015, that he is worried for the safety of

the employee who made the report. If we provide any further information, it may put that

employee in jeopardy. We are not going to do that.

CORVINOS PROTECTED ACTIVITY

33. Upon awareness of the October 2013 defensive tactics instructor classes, Corvino contacted

NMLEA personnel to ascertain the certification credentials of Alvarado whereby he was

Page 11 of 17

told Alvarado was not certified as a NMDPS Master Instructor in any law enforcement

subject matter.

34. Upon being informed of Alvarados certification deficiency, Corvino told Defendant

Archibeque and Defendant Wolf of invalidity of the October 2013 defensive tactics

instructor classes. Corvino was told by Defendants Wolf and Archibeque, and APD Police

Academy Sergeant David Jaramillo, not contact or talk with NMLEA personnel regarding

APD personnel certifications any more for any reason.

35. As part of his APD Police Academy position, and as a NMLEA certified defensive tactics

Master Instructor, Corvino spoke with and was in contact with NMLEA personnel on a

weekly basis. After being told not contact NMLEA personnel by Defendants Wolf and

Archibeque, Corvino continued to contact NMLEA personnel in compliance with

responsibilities of his position.

36. On about December 4, Corvino told and informed personnel at the NMLEA of his concerns

of the October 2013 defensive tactics instructor class up to and including the director of the

NMLEA. Corvino informed NMLEA personnel that the harmful consequences of the

invalid certifications upon APD and the cadets who were given the invalid instruction would

be immeasurable because it was unclear if the cadets were receiving training compliant with

NMLEA accreditation requirements.

37. On about December 11, 2013, Defendant Wolf wrote a letter on APD letterhead fabricating

facts relating to Corvino overseeing the October 2013 defensive tactics instructor classes

and approving of the instruction [Attached herein as Exhibit #1]. Defendant Wolfs letter

was presented to Corvino for him to sign as if he had written it. Corvino refused to sign the

letter or otherwise endorse it or the facts alleged in it.

Page 12 of 17

38. After refusing to the sign the letter, Corvino was advised by APD Academy Sergeant James

Collins that there was a copy of Defendant Wolfs letter in his mailbox and that Corvino

could take the copy. Corvino took a copy and made a digital image of it.

39. On about December 18, 2013, after informing Defendants Wolf and Archibeque of his

concerns about APD Police Academy continuing to have personnel uncertified to teach

defensive tactics to police cadets and his discussions with NMLEA personnel, Corvino was

ordered by Sergeant David Jaramillo not to contact NMLEA regarding APD personnel

certifications.

40. While again up at the NMLEA on about February 5, 2014, Corvino showed and provided

NMLEA personnel a copy of Defendant Wolfs letter alerting them to his concerns that not

only did he refuse to sign such a letter but that if such a letter were to be sent to NMLEA he

did not endorse it.

RETALIATION

41. In February 2014, Defendant Archibeque became aware of Corvinos actions of informing

NMLEA personnel of the invalidity of the October 2013 defensive tactics class and

providing them with a copy of Defendant Wolfs letter. Defendant Archibeque spoke with

APD Deputy Chief William Roseman concerning the matter and then wrote a memorandum

on about February 21, 2014 requesting an IA investigation into Corvino and his actions.

42. In his memorandum to IA, Defendant Archibeque alleged Corvinos behavior had been

detrimental to the APD academy and now the department as a whole. Defendant

Archibeque further alleged that Corvino, constantly [has] done all that he can do to bring

a negative image to the Academy and the Albuquerque Police Department[.]

Page 13 of 17

43. In the weeks and months following Defendant Archibeques memorandum to APD IA,

Corvino was excluded and ostracized from APD Academy events. Such exclusion included

Defendants Wolf and Archibeque disallowing Corvino from teaching police cadets entirely

and discontinuing other training opportunities with cadets such as scenarios.

44. Corvino was excluded from APD Academy personnel events including birthday or

promotion celebrations, denied issuance of Academy physical fitness apparel, given the

silent treatment, was subjected to increased scrutiny, denied use of the APD Academy gym,

was excluded from providing training to other personnel while other non-academy

personnel were brought in, excluded from providing instruction to APD Police Service Aids,

was criticized publicly by supervisors in front of other non-department officers, had his

office removed and was ordered to relocated to a cubicle, had his department issued car

replaced with an older used model, was disallowed to go home early on occasions where

others were allowed to leave early, and additionally found his office tampered with the

morning following evening training scenarios.

45. At no time did Defendant Wolf protect Corvino, or act in opposition of such actions upon

Corvino, from any such adverse actions upon Corvinos employment or working conditions.

46. During the course of the IA investigation, Corvino was interviewed three times. Upon the

conclusion of the investigation, the file was issued up to Defendant Eden who concluded

Corvino had violated APD SOPs concerning insubordination on the basis of his contact

with NMLEA personnel, had engaged in conduct that could bring APD into disrepute based

off of his contact with NMLEA personnel regarding the content of his contact with NMLEA

personnel, and had not treated the official business of APD as confidential based off of

Corvinos disclosure of Defendant Wolfs letter to NMLEA personnel.

Page 14 of 17

47. During the course of the APD IA investigation, Defendant Wolf was also identified as a

target for misconduct and was issued a letter of reprimand for his fabricated letter he sought

to have Corvino sign and endorse.

48. During the course of the APD IA investigation, NMLEA personnel are interviewed by APD

personnel. On about March 19, 2014, APD IA personnel are advised by NMLEA personnel

that:

A. Corvino informed them of Alvarados October 2013 defensive tactics classes.

B. Personnel who took Alvarados October 2013 classes are not permitted to instruct police

cadets.

C. Alvardos application for Master Instructor certification was denied.

D. Defensive tactics is recognized as a high risk field of training.

E. Cadets who received training by attendees from Alvarados class would not have

certifications recognized by NMDPS.

F. Cadets who graduate from APDs Police Academy technically would not be certified as

police officers because they technically would not have valid police officer certifications

in defensive tactics training.

49. During the IA investigation Defendant Wolf referred to NMLEA Master Instructor

certifications as simply honorary.

50. Defendant Wolf was named a target of the IA investigation of Corvino was issued a

disciplinary letter of reprimand for the fabricated letter he wrote in Corvinos name on

APD letterhead.

51. Corvinos discipline consisted of receiving an eighty-hour suspension whereby he lost forty

Page 15 of 17

paid hours of work and a formal record of discipline was entered into his personnel file. In

support of his effort to appeal his discipline through city administrative avenues, Corvino

incurred significant legal fees and time spent in support of his appeal.

V. CLAIM I

52. Corvino re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations referenced as if set forth herein.

53. Defendant City of Albuquerque is a public employer as defined by NMSA 1978, 10-16C-

2C.

54. Plaintiff Corvino was a public employee of the City of Albuquerque as defined by NMSA

1978, 10-16c-2B.

55. Corvino had a reasonable basis to believe Defendants Wolf and Archibeque had acted

unlawfully or improperly; when he reported their misconduct to NMLEA he acted in good

faith.

56. Corvinos actions and reporting supports good public policy.

57. Corvinos actions and reporting of Defendants Wolf and Archibeques conduct with the

NMLEA are activities expressly protected by sections 10-16C-2E and 10-16C-3A and B

of the Whistleblower Protection Act.

58. The City of Albuquerque, by and through its employees Defendants Eden, Wolf, and

Archibeque, violated the Whistleblower Protection Act by retaliating against Corvino for his

activities by adversely affecting his employment, his working conditions, and disciplining

him.

59. As a direct result of the City of Albuquerques illegal retaliation against Corvino, he was,

and continues to be, damaged in an amount to be proved at trial, which includes, but is not

Page 16 of 17

limited to: lost wages, lost overtime, humiliation including loss of professional reputation

and standing, emotional distress and anguish, and other compensatory damages.

VI. CLAIM IIPRIMA FACIE TORT & INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF

EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

60. Corvino re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations referenced as if set forth herein.

61. Defendant Archibeques conduct in retaliation against Corvino was intentional and

motivated by an intent to injure and harm Corvino, or was in reckless disregard of the fact

that he would be injured and harmed.

62. As the APD Academys Chief of Staff, Defendant Archibeques conduct and actions upon

Corvino was extreme and outrageous under the circumstances and duration.

63. Corvino was in fact injured and harmed by Defendant Archibeques actions. As a direct and

proximate result of Defendant Archibeques actions, Corvino experienced, and continues to

experience, severe emotional distress.

64. Defendant Archibeques conduct was unjustified, or was without sufficient justification.

65. Defendant Archibeques conduct was outside the scope of his duties and responsibilities as

defined by SOPs thus prohibiting application of the New Mexico Tort Claims Act.

66. Defendant Archibeques reckless and intentional conduct was such that imposition of

punitive damages is justified.

WHEREFORE Plaintiff John Corvino respectfully requests this Court grant judgment in

his favor and against Defendants based on the violation of the New Mexico Whistleblower

Protection Act, common law violations, award actual damages, attorneys fees and costs, special

damages, and punitive damages against individual Defendant Archibeque.

VII. JURY DEMAND

Page 17 of 17

Plaintiff respectfully requests a jury on all issues so triable.

VIII. REQUEST FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the following relief:

I. Actual and compensatory damages sufficient to make Plaintiff whole;

II. Punitive damages against Defendants sufficient to punish and deter their wrongful

conduct;

III. Attorneys fees, costs, and expenses;

IV. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Thomas R. Grover Thomas R. Grover GROVER LAW, LLC 9400 Holly NE, Bldg. 4 Albuquerque, NM 87122 Office: (505) 695-2050 Fax: (505) 944-1073 thomas@grover-law.com Attorney for Plaintiff

EXHIBIT #1