This appeal questioned Garrity v. New Jersey's applicability. This particular case involved statements that were obtained from an employee after that employee was threatened with job loss. The appeal held that those statements were unconstitutionally coerced. The Graham case began in September 2009, when allegations of misconduct were brought against a Department of Wildlife (DOW) employee as well as improper investigations on behalf of DOW officials. During an investigation, the appellants were never informed of their right to counsel before interviews. The trial court decided to suppress the appellant's statements, pursuant to Garrity. In obstruction of justice prosecution following internal investigation of state employees, their statements were deemed involuntary since they answered questions after receiving a warning that they could be fired for failing to do so; Garrity applies.