FILED IN MY OFFICE

DISTRICT COURT CLERK

5/7/2015 11:16:28 AM
James A. Noel
Patricia Serna

STATE OF NEW MEXICO

COUNTY OF BERNALILLO
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
JOHN CORVINO,
Plaintiff,
No.: D-202-CV-2015-03865
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.

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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 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 13 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 14 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, 10-16C2C.
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 15 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 16 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

Page 17 of 17

EXHIBIT
#1