# Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services v. Donahue

> Court of Appeals of Maryland · August 1, 2007 · 400 Md. 510

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9748977

## Case

- **Full name:** DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY & CORRECTIONAL SERVICES v. John DONAHUE
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Maryland
- **Decided:** August 1, 2007
- **Citations:** 400 Md. 510; 929 A.2d 512; 27 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 359; 2007 Md. LEXIS 485
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Harrell
- **Judges:** Rarer, Bell, Raker, Cathell, Harrell, Battaglia, Greene, Wilner
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9748977

## Opinion text

*540 Concurring Opinion by
HARRELL, J.
I concur in the Majority opinion for the reason that, even were I to assume the view of the Dissent as to the DPSCS’s asserted error regarding its interpretation of Donahue’s unavailability for the November 2002 mitigation conference(s), the result nonetheless would be the same as reached by the Majority opinion because Donahue was ineligible to become a DPSCS employee again by reason of his criminal convictions. See Maj. op. at 538-39, 929 A.2d at 529-30. Even though the suspension of any period of incarceration pursuant to the convictions (to which charges Donahue plead guilty) did not mandate that Donahue necessarily be deemed ineligible for employment under the relevant COMAR provisions (see Maj. op. at 538-39, 929 A.2d at 529), the DPSCS’s permissibly more restrictive hiring standards (promulgated in May 2000) made plain that Donahue was not qualified for reemployment. There is no indication in the record extract that Donahue at any time sought to withdraw his 1999 guilty pleas or coram nobis relief because of the collateral consequences that his convictions would have on his employment situation with the DPSCS. Moreover, there is no proffer in the record extract of anything Donahue might have offered in mitigation of his admitted criminal activities that could have changed the result. It is abundantly clear to me, on this record, that the result reached by Warden Rupee and the Secretary of DPSCS was foreordained, as a matter of law.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9748977. Public record. Not legal advice.