Michael Maudlin was a state trooper in New Jersey from 1987 until 2009. He left the State Police pursuant to an agreement with his employer. Maudlin agreed to plead guilty to alleged misconduct and retire in order to preserve his right to collect a pension. On August 12, 2021, Maudlin applied for a permit to carry a handgun as a retired law enforcement officer (RLEO).
The state statute governing RLEO permits reads “nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent a law enforcement officer who retired in good standing from carrying a handgun,” so long as certain conditions are met. The agency tasked with reviewing RLEO permit applications explained that Maudlin “resigned,” rather than “retired in good standing,” and therefore was ineligible. Maudlin disagreed, and unsuccessfully appealed the decision in court. He appealed again.
The appellate court affirmed, finding that the lower court correctly determined that Maudlin was not entitled to an RLEO permit due to the circumstances of his separation from the State Police. Maudlin testified at trial that he voluntarily resigned as part of the plea agreement following an internal affairs investigation. The Court did not credit his testimony in which he claimed that he understood his agreement to constitute a “retirement in good standing,” rather than a resignation. Under the plain meaning of the statute, these circumstances were a “resignation,” rather than a “retirement.” The Court did not address Maudlin’s argument that he retired “in good standing,” as it found that he had not retired at all.
In re: Michael Maudlin, DOCKET NO. A-2399-22, 2024 WL 2232908 (N.J. Super. App. Div., 2024).