Does an Illinois public employee lose their pension after a felony conviction connected to the job?

Plain-English summary

In 2011 the Executive Secretary of the Illinois State Employees' Retirement System asked the Attorney General whether a member who had been convicted of two felonies forfeited his pension. The member, a former Illinois State Trooper named Juan Rodriguez, had pleaded guilty to official misconduct and to possession of child pornography. The misconduct happened while he was on duty: he used a State-owned computer to access the internet and view child pornography.

Attorney General Lisa Madigan concluded that the convictions required forfeiture of his retirement benefits. Section 14-149 of the Pension Code says no benefits may be paid to a person "convicted of any felony relating to or arising out of or in connection with his service as an employee." The AG read that language to cover Rodriguez's crimes, because he could not have committed them in the way he did without the State equipment and on-duty position his job gave him. The opinion left one thing intact: a forfeiting member still has the right to a refund of the contributions he personally paid into the system.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2011. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

What the opinion meant for the people it touched

State pension administrators (at the time): The opinion told the State Employees' Retirement System that the forfeiture trigger in section 14-149 turned on a "nexus" test, not on the label of the crime. The question the AG used was whether a connection existed between the employee's criminal wrongdoing and the performance of his official duties. Where that connection was present, the AG read the statute as requiring the system to deny benefits, while still allowing a refund of the member's own contributions.

Public employees convicted of a felony (as of 2011): Under the law as it stood, a felony conviction did not automatically wipe out a pension. The forfeiture provision reached only felonies "relating to or arising out of or in connection with" the person's public service. The AG's reasoning here turned on the on-duty misuse of State property, which it treated as exactly the abuse of public trust the statute was written to discourage.

Prosecutors and defense counsel (at the time): The opinion is a worked example of how Illinois courts and the AG had applied the nexus test, citing the line of Illinois Supreme Court and Appellate Court decisions (Kerner, Devoney, Bauer, Ryan, Shields) that defined when a public employee's crime was close enough to the job to forfeit a pension.

Common questions

Did a felony conviction by itself cancel an Illinois public pension?
No. The forfeiture provision the AG applied, section 14-149 of the Pension Code, reached only felonies connected to the person's public service. The AG framed the controlling question as whether there was a nexus between the crime and the employee's official duties.

Why did the AG treat this trooper's crimes as job-connected?
Because the offenses happened on duty and used State property. The opinion noted that he used a State-owned computer during State work time, and reasoned that without his position with the Illinois State Police he would not have been able to commit the crimes the way he did.

Did the employee lose the money he had paid in?
No. The opinion was explicit that forfeiture did not reach the member's own contributions. Citing Shields v. Judges' Retirement System of Illinois, the AG said Rodriguez retained the right to a refund of what he had paid into the system.

Was this opinion binding on the retirement system?
An Illinois AG opinion is persuasive authority, not a court judgment. It advised the State Employees' Retirement System on how the AG read the statute. A member who disagreed could still litigate the question.

Background and statutory framework

The request came from Timothy B. Blair, Executive Secretary of the State Employees' Retirement System. The factual record was the criminal case in DuPage County: on a guilty plea, Rodriguez was convicted of one count of official misconduct and one count of possession of child pornography, both Class 3 felonies under Illinois law.

The operative statute was section 14-149 of the Pension Code, which bars payment of benefits to a member "convicted of any felony relating to or arising out of or in connection with his service as an employee," while preserving any vested contractual right acquired earlier and "the right to a refund." The AG explained that the purpose of felony-forfeiture provisions is to protect the public's right to conscientious service and to discourage official misconduct by denying retirement benefits to a public servant convicted of unfaithfulness to his trust, citing Ryan and Kerner. The "critical inquiry," drawn from Devoney and Bauer, was whether a nexus existed between the wrongdoing and the official duties.

Citations

Statutes:
- 720 ILCS 5/33-3(b) (West 2008) (official misconduct)
- 720 ILCS 5/11-20.1(a)(6) (West 2008) (possession of child pornography)
- 720 ILCS 5/11-20.1(c), 33-3 (West 2008) (offenses designated Class 3 felonies)
- Section 14-149 of the Pension Code (felony forfeiture of benefits)
- Ill. Const. 1970, art. VIII, §1

Cases:
- People v. Rodriguez, Docket No. 10-CF-1390 (Circuit Court, DuPage County)
- Ryan v. Board of Trustees of the General Assembly Retirement System, 236 Ill. 2d 315, 322 (2010)
- Kerner v. State Employees' Retirement System, 72 Ill. 2d 507, 513 (1978), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 923, 99 S. Ct. 2032 (1979)
- Devoney v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund for the City of Chicago, 199 Ill. 2d 414, 419 (2002)
- Bauer v. State Employees' Retirement System, 366 Ill. App. 3d 1007, 1014 (2006), appeal denied, 222 Ill. 2d 267 (2006)
- Shields v. Judges' Retirement System of Illinois, 204 Ill. 2d 488, 497 (2003), appeal denied, 219 Ill. 2d 598 (2006)

Source

• Index page: https://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/
• Original PDF: https://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/dA/4e74cf0d7c/2011%2011-004%20PENSIONS%20Felony%20Forfeiture%20of%20Pension%20Benefits.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain — the linked PDF is authoritative.

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
STATE OF ILLINOIS

Lisa Madigan
ATTORNEY GENERAL

December 14, 2011

FILE NO. 11-004

PENSIONS:
Felony Forfeiture of
Pension Benefits

Mr. Timothy B. Blair
Executive Secretary
State Employees' Retirement System
2101 South Veterans Parkway
P.O. Box 19255
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9255

[Dear Mr. Blair:]

[You have asked whether Juan Rodriguez, a member of] the State Employees' Retirement System, has forfeited his pension benefits as a result of his convictions of official misconduct (720 ILCS 5/33-3(b) (West 2008)) and possession of child pornography (720 ILCS 5/11-20.1(a)(6) (West 2008)). For the reasons stated below, it is my opinion that Juan Rodriguez's criminal convictions require the forfeiture of his pension benefits.

500 South Second Street, Springfield, Illinois 62706 (217) 782-1090 TTY: (217) 785-2771 Fax: (217) 782-7046
100 West Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois 60601 (312) 814-3000 TTY: (312) 814-3374 Fax: (312) 814-3806
1001 East Main, Carbondale, Illinois 62901 (618) 529-6400 TTY: (618) 529-6403 Fax: (618) 529-6416

Mr. Timothy B. Blair - 2

BACKGROUND

According to the records of the Circuit Court of the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, on June 14, 2011, Rodriguez was convicted upon a plea of guilty of one count of official misconduct and one count of possession of child pornography. People v. Rodriguez, Docket No. 10-CF-1390 (Circuit Court, DuPage County). The multi-count indictment, pursuant to which the convictions were entered, charged that, on or about August 14, 2009, while Rodriguez was employed as an Illinois State Trooper, he performed, in his official capacity, an act which he knew he was forbidden by law to perform. Indictment, Count 2, People v. Rodriguez, Docket No. 10-CF-1390-02 (Circuit Court, DuPage County, June 17, 2010). Specifically, while on duty as an Illinois State Trooper, Rodriguez used a State-owned computer to access the internet and view child pornography. Further, Rodriguez also "knowingly possessed a depiction by computer of a child * * * which * * * show[ed] the child actually engaged in an act of lewd touching involving another person[.]" Indictment, Count 21, Rodriguez, Docket No. 10-CF-1390-21. The offenses of official misconduct and possession of child pornography are Class 3 felonies under Illinois law. 720 ILCS 5/11-20.1(c), 33-3 (West 2008).

ANALYSIS

Section 14-149 of the Pension Code provides, with respect to members of the State Employees' Retirement System:

Felony conviction. None of the benefits herein provided for shall be paid to any person who is convicted of any felony relating to or arising out of or in connection with his service as an employee.

Mr. Timothy B. Blair - 3

This Section shall not operate to impair any contract or vested right heretofore acquired under any law or laws continued in this Article nor to preclude the right to a refund.

All future entrants entering service subsequent to July 9, 1955 shall be deemed to have consented to the provisions of this section as a condition of coverage. (Emphasis added.)

The purpose of the felony forfeiture provisions in the Pension Code is to protect the public's right to conscientious service from those in governmental positions. These provisions discourage official misconduct by denying retirement benefits to the public servant convicted of unfaithfulness to his trust. Ryan v. Board of Trustees of the General Assembly Retirement System, 236 Ill. 2d 315, 322 (2010); Kerner v. State Employees' Retirement System, 72 Ill. 2d 507, 513 (1978), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 923, 99 S. Ct. 2032 (1979). The critical inquiry in determining whether a felony is "relat[ed] to or ar[ose] out of or in connection with" service as an employee is whether a nexus existed between the employee's criminal wrongdoing and the performance of his official duties. Devoney v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund for the City of Chicago, 199 Ill. 2d 414, 419 (2002); Bauer v. State Employees' Retirement System, 366 Ill. App. 3d 1007, 1014 (2006), appeal denied, 222 Ill. 2d 267 (2006).

Rodriguez's convictions for official misconduct and possession of child pornography clearly related to, arose out of, or were in connection with his service as an Illinois State Trooper. As a State employee, Rodriguez was under a duty to use public property only for lawful, public purposes. See generally Ill. Const. 1970, art. VIII, §1. While working as an Illinois State Trooper, however, Rodriguez violated that duty. He misappropriated the State's

Mr. Timothy B. Blair - 4

computers and property and improperly used State work time to commit the crimes for which he was convicted. Were it not for his employment with the Illinois State Police, Rodriguez would not have been in a position to use State property to engage in this clear violation of the public trust. This is precisely the type of abuse of trust by a government employee that section 14-149 of the Pension Code was intended to discourage.

CONCLUSION

Based upon the records of the Circuit Court of the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, it is my opinion that Juan Rodriguez has forfeited his retirement benefits pursuant to section 14-149 of the Pension Code. He does retain the right to a refund of his contributions to the System, however. Shields v. Judges' Retirement System of Illinois, 204 Ill. 2d 488, 497 (2003), appeal denied, 219 Ill. 2d 598 (2006).

Very truly yours,

LISA MADIGAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL