Can i become a police officer if i've been arrested a few times?

[helmholtz_watson]

Hi, i have been contemplating a career change to Police Officer but am afraid that some incidents in my past with a mentally disturbed ex-girlfriend may hinder that process. Long story short, between September 2011 and June 2012 i was arrested 4times (in NYC) based on fabricated accusations of domestic violence. Three of the 4 arrests were dismissed for failure to prosecute (after dozsens of trips to court) but on the 4th one i stupidly went against my intuition and took my lawyers advice and plead down to disorderly conduct because at this point, i had been in court for about a year and half straight on all 4 cases and i had been missing a lot of work. My attorney assured me that the disorderly conduct charge was no worse than getting a parking ticket since it is not considered a crime in NYS. I paid a $120 fine and a "limited" order of protection was issued for a year that has since expired. Is it possible for these events to completley impede or make it highly unlikely to be hired by the NYPD or other department? I'm looking into applying for police officer jobs in CT as well.

Also, some of the original charges on the cases were very bad. They stem from assault to strangulation and burglary but i was never convicted of any crime. A lot of terrible things were said about me and although my name has technically been cleared i understand someone reading the original police reports would def raise an eyebrow.

If it counts for anything, the first time the police were involved i was the one that made the 911 call because she was attacking me but they eneded up arresting both of us. She was also arrested another time for violating an order protection i had against her but she ended up getting an ACD on both those. The woman in question also has a misdemeanor conviction for identity theft and if you google her name a couple of the crazy things she's done that made the news pop up.
Aside from the ordeals with this woman, i have not had any trouble with the law in my 29 years of existence.

There is nothing else in my history that would disqualify me or throw up any red flags. I have a bachelor's degree, excellent credit, have had steady employment for 10+ years and do volunteer work.

[Shush]

here we go again.

[helmholtz_watson]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]11580[/ATTACH]

here we go again.

LOL. I didn't find the answer i was looking for using search. Perhaps i should have been a bit more clear. I understand that a Felony will preclude any one from becoming a police officer and so will any misdemeanor domestic violence conviction because being convicted of these kinds of crimes take away your right to own a firearm. I guess a better way to phrase my original question is: Would a non-criminal domestic violence infraction that does not result in losing the right to own a firearm disqualify you from becoming a police officer?

[PhilipCal]

ANY Domestic Violence incident, either as a suspect or a victim is going to be looked at long, hard ,and critically by ANY agency to which you apply. ANY conviction arising out of a Domestic Violence incident can, conceivably preclude you from owning or using a firearm.

Additionally, an agency, based on it's own policies, could very well elect not to employ you. Consider that you have a total of four Domestic Violence situations which are a matter of record with a police agency.

Any one of these instances, regardless of final disposition or adjudication, could be grounds for an agency electing not to employ you. Your specific situation(s) will be judged in a totality of circumstances.

You can also count on the question being asked, why you had FOUR separate DV situations with this one individual. You may not be asked that question directly, but it will be asked.

[L-1]

I don't have time to look it up but I believe under Federal law you are still prohibited from possessing a weapon. Under the Lautenberg amendment it doesn't matter that the charges were reduced. The fact that they were associated with DV still precludes weapons possession.

[helmholtz_watson]

I don't have time to look it up but I believe under Federal law you are still prohibited from possessing a weapon. Under the Lautenberg amendment it doesn't matter that the charges were reduced. The fact that they were associated with DV still precludes weapons possession.

This is what had me afraid in the first place and i'm glad you brought it up. I looked into the matter and the Lautenberg Amendment is only specific to crimes. Meaning if one crime is reduced to a lesser crime, a felony to a misdemeanor for example. What i plead guilty to is not considered a crime in my state and since NY classifies it's crimes by felonies, misdemeanors, etc, the State law applies and not the overlybroad Federal definition of the term "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence".

[PhilipCal]

This is what had me afraid in the first place and i'm glad you brought it up. I looked into the matter and the Lautenberg Amendment is only specific to crimes. Meaning if one crime is reduced to a lesser crime, a felony to a misdemeanor for example. What i plead guilty to is not considered a crime in my state and since NY classifies it's crimes by felonies, misdemeanors, etc, the State law applies and not the overlybroad Federal definition of the term "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence".

Just for your consideration. Lautenberg is a federal law. Federal Law in general, trumps state law. For that reason, and as has been noted to you, you could very well be precluded from owning, possessing, carrying a firearm, and thus unemployable as a police officer.

[L-1]

This is what had me afraid in the first place and i'm glad you brought it up. I looked into the matter and the Lautenberg Amendment is only specific to crimes. Meaning if one crime is reduced to a lesser crime, a felony to a misdemeanor for example. What i plead guilty to is not considered a crime in my state and since NY classifies it's crimes by felonies, misdemeanors, etc, the State law applies and not the overlybroad Federal definition of the term "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence".

I would do a little more research. I believe somewhere there are case decisions indicating that if there is a conviction on a reduced charge from a misdemeanor involving DV, Lautenberg still applies. Dig deeper.

[helmholtz_watson]

Just for your consideration. Lautenberg is a federal law. Federal Law in general, trumps state law. For that reason, and as has been noted to you, you could very well be precluded from owning, possessing, carrying a firearm, and thus unemployable as a police officer.

I dont believe this one of those cases of state vs. federal. Simply put, if you are convicted of a Misdemeanor related to domestic violence under your state's laws, then Lautenberg is there to prevent you from buying/possessing a firearm nationwide. However, some states don't break down their crimes as felonies, misdemeanors, etc (NJ for example), and that's when the Federal Defintion is applied which pretty much makes any offense a "misdemeanor domestic violence offense". I did not committ a misdemeanor under my state's laws and my state does indeed classify it's crimes as such so i think i should be okay as far as being able to carry a firearm. I'm just hoping that something like this isnt an automatic disqualifcation and handled on a case by case basis. Anyone that sits down and looks over the facts of what happened to me and the character of the person who made the accusations against me would quickly see that it was all BS.

[Shush]

I dont believe this one of those cases of state vs. federal. Simply put, if you are convicted of a Misdemeanor related to domestic violence under your state's laws, then Lautenberg is there to prevent you from buying/possessing a firearm nationwide. However, some states don't break down their crimes as felonies, misdemeanors, etc (NJ for example), and that's when the Federal Defintion is applied which pretty much makes any offense a "misdemeanor domestic violence offense". I did not committ a misdemeanor under my state's laws and my state does indeed classify it's crimes as such so i think i should be okay as far as being able to carry a firearm. I'm just hoping that something like this isnt an automatic disqualifcation and handled on a case by case basis. Anyone that sits down and looks over the facts of what happened to me and the character of the person who made the accusations against me would quickly see that it was all BS.

They will also wonder why a person has such a bad choice of gf's to stay around after the first one. and the second one. and the third one.

They will also wonder if a person 4 times accused of DV can be subjective on the same type call.

They will also see that the 1 charge that wasn't dropped was reduced instead of discharged. Agreeing to a reduced sentence is the same as pleading guilty with leniency in a review board.

Her character matters not -- she is not the one trying to get into law enforcement.

[helmholtz_watson]

They will also wonder why a person has such a bad choice of gf's to stay around after the first one. and the second one. and the third one.

They will also wonder if a person 4 times accused of DV can be subjective on the same type call.

They will also see that the 1 charge that wasn't dropped was reduced instead of discharged. Agreeing to a reduced sentence is the same as pleading guilty with leniency in a review board.

Her character matters not -- she is not the one trying to get into law enforcement.

I understand that anyone looking to be a police officer will have past incidents looked at very closely. I dont think there is a clear cut answer to my original question so i guess i'll just send out applications and see what happens.

Thanks to all that responded.

[Iowa #1603]

This is what had me afraid in the first place and i'm glad you brought it up. I looked into the matter and the Lautenberg Amendment is only specific to crimes. Meaning if one crime is reduced to a lesser crime, a felony to a misdemeanor for example. What i plead guilty to is not considered a crime in my state and since NY classifies it's crimes by felonies, misdemeanors, etc, the State law applies and not the overlybroad Federal definition of the term "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence".

I would not hire you based on your plea of guilty to a lesser included offense. The plea bargain down from Domestic Violence related offense would open up way too many problems LATER should something happen.

Quite honestly , most cops (and especially Law Enforcement ADMINISTRATORS) beleive in the fact that " If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duct and appears to be a duck, it PROBABLY IS A DUCK"------even it is is written down in stone that it isn't a duck.

In this case, the "duck' is the FOUR charges of Domestic Violence in SEVEN MONTHS----none of us is going to believe for half a minute that you were not involved in a violent relationship with your girlfriend. And neither will a prospective employer.

If by chance you later had a questionable use of force, your background (yes even the "reduced charges" and "dropped charges" will be brought up.................every time.

I understand that anyone looking to be a police officer will have past incidents looked at very closely. I dont think there is a clear cut answer to my original question so i guess i'll just send out applications and see what happens.

Thanks to all that responded.

So in other words-----------------you don't believe what you are told so you are going to do what you want anyway.

Once again, You are most likely not EVER going to be hired as a police officer

They will also wonder why a person has such a bad choice of gf's to stay around after the first one. and the second one. and the third one.

They will also wonder if a person 4 times accused of DV can be subjective on the same type call.

They will also see that the 1 charge that wasn't dropped was reduced instead of discharged. Agreeing to a reduced sentence is the same as pleading guilty with leniency in a review board.

Her character matters not -- she is not the one trying to get into law enforcement.

^^^^^^^ Read this one carefully

[Sierra259]

That would be a loud, resounding "no" at my agency. Too much liability when we have applicants who don't have any of the baggage you have and more to bring to the table than you do.

[helmholtz_watson]

I would expect some of these responses impugning my integrity from laypersons but i would think most people in law enforcement would know that when an Order of Protection is issued, it pretty much gives whoever has the order the ability to have the subject of that order arrested whenever he or she pleases. If someone has an order of protection against me and says i did something to violate that order, regardless of how outragous the lie, or lack of evidence, etc., i get arrested. Simple as that. All it takes is one vindictive person to get the ball rolling. If you guys are telling me that fabricated charges against me that i was never convicted of, made by a mentally disturbed invidual will be an albatross around my neck in my efforts to become a police officer then i'll have to find out for myself. I have nothing to lose but the application fee.

[HotSoup]

That fact that it took four arrests on "fabricated" charges before you saw the light and moved on will be your biggest hurdle....it matters not that you one charge YOU plead to got downgraded...it's still a conviction and you won't have a chance.