P.S. Docket No. POB 96-428
February 24, 1997
In the Matter of the Petition by )
)
MICHAEL H. BRIGGS )
c/o Marin County Jail #0085257 )
13 Memorial Drive )
)
at )
)
San Rafael, CA 94903-5207 ) P.S. Docket No. POB 96-428
APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER: Michael H. Briggs
625 Northern Avenue
Mill Valley, CA 94941-3935
APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT: Christine M. Taylor, Esq.
Consumer Protection Law
United States Postal Service
475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW
Washington, DC 20260-1127
POSTAL SERVICE DECISION
Petitioner, Michael H. Briggs, has filed an appeal from an Initial Decision of an Administrative Law Judge granting Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment and upholding the determination of the Mill Valley, CA, Postmaster to close P.O. Box 2401. Respondent, United States Postal Service, opposes the appeal and argues that the Initial Decision should be affirmed.
BACKGROUND
On November 21, 1996, Petitioner was arrested (1) outside the Mill Valley Post Office for threatening to shoot several postal employees after he became upset with their service.(2) By letter dated November 27, 1996, the Mill Valley Postmaster notified Petitioner that his post office box was being closed "due to the recent problem [he] had at the Mill [V]alley Post Office.(3) " In the Initial Decision the Administrative Law Judge determined that the record sufficiently documented Petitioner's disruptive behavior, which included making obscene and threatening statements to postal employees on numerous other occasions,(4) and concluded that the Mill Valley Postmaster had properly closed Petitioner's post office box. Since Petitioner submitted no evidence that he did not make the threatening remark or that he had not made obscene or threatening statements to postal employees on other occasions, the Administrative Law Judge granted Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment and upheld the Postmaster's decision to terminate service to P.O. Box 2401.
DISCUSSION
On appeal Petitioner contends that there is no proof that he made the verbal threats. He also contends that postal employees were interfering with his mail service and that the closure of P.O. Box 2401 violates his right to mail delivery. None of Petitioner's contentions have merit.
The record supports the Administrative Law Judge's conclusion that Petitioner verbally abused and threatened Postal Service employees and that he created disturbances in the presence of postal customers.(5) Petitioner contends that because the Postal Service failed to appear at a hearing related to the November 21, 1996 incident, there is no proof that he threatened postal employees in any manner. The record does not support Petitioner's contention. The purpose of the hearing was to establish only whether an Injunction Prohibiting Harassment of Employee could be issued against Petitioner. Neither the dissolution of the Temporary Restraining Order at the hearing nor the decision of the District Attorney not to prosecute Petitioner on the criminal charges proves that Petitioner did not make the threat documented in the record by the police report and accompanying witness statements. Other than his assertion on appeal, Petitioner has presented no evidence to prove he did not threaten postal employees or that the police report and statements are false or erroneous. Accordingly, Petitioner's contention lacks merit.
The record also does not support Petitioner's second contention that the employees at the Mill Valley Post Office were tampering with and stealing his business related mail.(6) Even if Petitioner's accusations were true, they would not excuse his actions on November 21, 1996.
Finally, Petitioner asserts that it is a "matter of personal privacy to receive mail in a rightful legitimate means" and that the termination of service to P.O. Box 2401 interferes with this right. However, there is no legal right to post office box service(7) and the closing of P.O. Box 2401 does not deprive Petitioner of the ability to receive mail.(8) The Administrative Law Judge properly concluded that Petitioner's threat of physical harm directed at postal employees was a sufficient basis for discontinuing Petitioner's post office box service.
Petitioner has not shown that the Postmaster's decision to close P.O. Box 2401 was improper or that the record does not support the Administrative Law Judge's conclusion that the Postmaster's decision was proper. Accordingly, Petitioner's appeal is denied and the Administrative Law Judge's Initial Decision upholding the termination of service to P.O. Box 2401 is affirmed.
James A. Cohen
Judicial Officer
1. Petitioner was charged with violating California Penal Code §422, making a terrorist threat to kill or seriously injure another person. Cal. Penal Code §422 (West 1996). See Respondent’s Answer and Motion for Summary Judgment (Answer), Ex. 4.
4. ID FOF 2 and 6; Statements of J. Toledo and D.J. Ecklebarger, dated Nov. 11, 1996 and Statement of D.J. Ecklebarger, dated Oct. 11, 1996 (Answer, Ex. 12); Combined Crime and Arrest Report, Mill Valley Police Dep’t, dated Nov. 21, 1996 (Answer, Ex. 4); Supplemental Officer’s Report, Mill Valley Police Dep’t, dated Nov. 25, 1996 (Answer, Ex. 5).
5. Combined Crime and Arrest Report, Mill Valley Police Dep’t, dated Nov. 21, 1996 (Answer, Ex. 4); Supplemental Officer’s Report, Mill Valley Police Dep’t, dated Nov. 25, 1996 (Answer, Ex. 5); Statements of J. Toledo and M. Lee, dated Nov. 21, 1996 (Answer, Ex. 12).
7. William H. Lahan, P.S. Docket No. 24/156 (P.S.D. Dec. 31, 1986); Anthony E. DiBari, P.S. Docket No. 20/21 (P.S.D. Jan. 24, 1985).