A former deputy sheriff has paid $65,000 for an ethics violation after the state found out he auctioned a seized home to his wife — which she later renovated with his help and sold at a profit.

Ex-Bristol County Deputy Sheriff Floyd Teague has paid a $40,000 civil penalty and $25,000 in economic advantage damages for violating the conflict of interest law, according to the Massachusetts State Ethics Commission.

Teague conducted a public auction in which he placed an absentee bid on behalf of his wife for a seized modular home, and then awarded her the home, the Commission said this week.

The home went for $20,000 at the auction, and his wife later sold the home for $309,900.

“When public employees in the exercise of their official authority act to enrich themselves and their families rather than to serve the public interest, they betray the public’s trust and undermine their fellow citizens’ confidence in the integrity of public service and government institutions,” said State Ethics Commission Executive Director David Wilson.

“The conflict of interest law strictly prohibits such misconduct,” Wilson added.

Teague, who made $87,473 last year, was a deputy sheriff from 1999 until January of this year. As deputy sheriff, he would auction property when the Bristol County Sheriff’s Office was retained to do so.

Last March, an attorney for a homeowners’ association had Teague handle the seizure and auction of a modular home to cover past-due fees that were owed to the association.

Before the auction, Teague posted a “Notice of Order of Sale,” which announced the auction and that bidders would need to provide $5,000 cash or certified check, payable immediately after the sale.

Meanwhile, Teague talked with his wife about the home and agreed to place a $20,000 bid on her behalf. His wife did not provide $5,000 cash or certified check.

About a dozen people attended the auction, during which Teague announced that bidders needed to provide $5,000 and that the auction floor was the $18,542 in past-due fees owed to the homeowners’ association.

Teague then announced he had a $20,000 bid and declared, “going once, going twice, sold for $20,000,” concluding the auction.

Sometime after the auction, Teague’s wife gave him a $20,000 bank check, which he turned over to the Sheriff’s Office’s Civil Process Division.

In the following months, Teague helped his wife in renovating and improving the modular home and its grounds.

His wife spent about $44,000 on contractors and supplies associated with the renovation and improvements. Then last October, Teague’s wife sold the modular home for $309,900.

The conflict of interest law bans state employees from participating in matters in which they or their immediate family have a financial interest.

Teague violated this prohibition by agreeing to place his spouse’s bid, by conducting the auction when he knew his spouse was bidding on the modular home, and by awarding her the home.

Also, by not requiring his spouse to produce $5,000 in cash or certified check to participate in the auction, Teague violated the conflict of interest law’s prohibition against public employees using their official positions to secure valuable unwarranted privileges for themselves or others. Teague’s violations were to his economic advantage.