Alvarez v. Kelly
This text of 2 A.D.3d 219 (Alvarez v. Kelly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Determination of respondent Folice Commissioner, dated January 31, 2002, dismissing petitioner from his position as a police officer upon findings that he made a false 911 call of a [220]*220burglary in progress while off duty and made false statements concerning the call in his departmental interview, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [James Yates, J], entered November 21, 2002) dismissed, without costs.
Substantial evidence, including the unchallenged testimony of telephone technology experts, establishes that the 911 call that petitioner made concerning a burglary in progress at a public school in Brooklyn was made from a pay phone in upper Manhattan, and not, as petitioner claims, from his cell phone as he drove past the school on his way home from his Brooklyn station house. No basis exists to disturb respondent’s findings of credibility (see Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 NY2d 436, 443-444 [1987]). The penalty of dismissal does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32, 38 [2001]). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Mazzarelli and Ellerin, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 A.D.3d 219, 768 N.Y.S.2d 315, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alvarez-v-kelly-nyappdiv-2003.