Bocchiano v. New York City Police Department

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bocchiano v. New York City Police Department

213 A.D.2d 264, 624 N.Y.S.2d 21

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 21, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 213 A.D.2d 264 (Bocchiano v. New York City Police Department) 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.

Bluebook

Bocchiano v. New York City Police Department, 213 A.D.2d 264, 624 N.Y.S.2d 21 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Angela Mazzarelli, J.), entered on or about August 24, 1994, which, in this CPLR article 78 proceeding, denied and dismissed the petition challenging respondents’ determination revoking petitioner’s license to possess a handgun for target shooting, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record indicates that in violation of the applicable licensing provision (38 RCNY 5-22 [a] [16]), petitioner carried a loaded handgun, not in a locked container, and failed to proceed directly from the firing range to his home. Additionally, the Hearing Officer found that petitioner provided unreliable and evasive testimony at the hearing and displayed a lack of responsibility and thus did not possess the good moral character required (38 RCNY 5-02 [a]). Accordingly, the determination has a rational basis in the record and was not an abuse of discretion, and was properly confirmed (Sewell v City of New York, 182 AD2d 469, 473, lv denied 80 NY2d 756). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Ellerin and Williams, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Angela Mazzarelli, J.), entered on or about August 24, 1994, which, in this CPLR article 78 proceeding, denied and dismissed the petition challenging respondents’ determination revoking petitioner’s license to possess a handgun for target shooting, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record indicates that in violation of the applicable licensing provision (38 RCNY 5-22 [a] [16]), petitioner carried a loaded handgun, not in a locked container, and failed to proceed directly from the firing range to his home. Additionally, the Hearing Officer found that petitioner provided unreliable and evasive testimony at the hearing and displayed a lack of responsibility and thus did not possess the good moral character required (38 RCNY 5-02 [a]). Accordingly, the determination has a rational basis in the record and was not an abuse of discretion, and was properly confirmed (Sewell v City of New York, 182 AD2d 469, 473, lv denied 80 NY2d 756). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Ellerin and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

213 A.D.2d 264, 624 N.Y.S.2d 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bocchiano-v-new-york-city-police-department-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack