“He will receive no pension or health benefits, nor will he be allowed to carry a firearm,” said Devora Kaye, the acting deputy commissioner for public information. “His actions are wholly inconsistent with the values and standards the New York City Police Department expects and demands of its officers.”

Officer Reynolds, 26, had apologized in court for the episode and claimed that he had no memory of it because he had been drinking heavily.

“I’m sorry,” he testified. “I made a mistake. I consumed too much alcohol.”

Edward Yarbrough, Officer Reynolds’s lawyer, said in an interview that because of the jail time, “We think his job is in jeopardy.” Mr. Yarbrough had sought a sentence that could have allowed his client to keep his job and have his record expunged in several years.

The case of Officer Reynolds is again focusing scrutiny on the pace of the Police Department’s disciplinary process. In a prominent example of how it can drag on, five years passed before Officer Daniel Pantaleo, whose use of a prohibited chokehold contributed to the 2014 death in police custody of Eric Garner, was fired and stripped of his pension benefits in August.

The police commissioner has the ultimate say over firings, but police unions typically fight such moves. Officers who are ousted sometimes sue to try to get back their jobs and benefits, as Mr. Pantaleo is doing.

Officer Reynolds’s crimes did not occur in the line of duty, nor did he cause physical injuries. But Ms. Halliburton testified that he had done significant psychological damage.

“My kids want to move,” she said at the sentencing on Dec. 6. “They don’t want to be in that house anymore. We don’t have peace. To know that you’ve been living somewhere all your life, and you don’t have that anymore, and where would you go, it’s not fair.”