Rojas

INTRODUCTION

Adrian Rojas appeals from the denial of his petition for administrative mandate filed after the State Personnel Board (the Board) upheld the termination of his position with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (the Department). The trial court found that sufficient evidence presented at an administrative hearing supported his termination for dishonesty and failure of good behavior. We affirm. Our role is not to retry the case, but to determine whether substantial evidence supports the administrative law judge’s decisions. There was ample evidence that Rojas’ actions in fabricating reports for other Department employees were both dishonest and likely to result in discredit to the Department. These reports are official documents that may become evidence in legal proceedings. Like Caesar’s wife, they must be above suspicion, at least as to their truthfulness. Rojas’ actions seriously undermined the Department’s ability to present the reports as reflecting actual events, which could, under easily foreseeable circumstances, have proved disastrous. We likewise conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion when it upheld the Department’s penalty of…