Cerciello v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cerciello v. Kelly

8 A.D.3d 128, 779 N.Y.S.2d 46, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8532

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

DecidedJune 17, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.3d 128 (Cerciello 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.

Bluebook

Cerciello v. Kelly, 8 A.D.3d 128, 779 N.Y.S.2d 46, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8532 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of the Director of respondent’s License Division, dated May 8, 2002, which, after a hearing, revoked petitioner’s “business license” to carry a pistol, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.], entered April 14, 2003) dismissed, without costs.

The revocation was supported by substantial evidence (Matter [129]*129of Trimis v New York City Police Dept., 300 AD2d 162 [2002], lv denied 100 NY2d 503 [2003]) indicating lack of moral character and fitness to possess a firearm (Penal Law § 400.00 [1]; 38 RCNY 5-02), including petitioner’s arrest on theft and fencing charges in New Jersey, resolution of those charges by restitution to the victim, failure to notify the License Division of the arrest for more than a year, and failure to promptly notify the License Division of a robbery at petitioner’s business establishment (38 RCNY 5-22 [c] [1]; 5-30 [c], [d]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Andrias, Williams and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Determination of the Director of respondent’s License Division, dated May 8, 2002, which, after a hearing, revoked petitioner’s “business license” to carry a pistol, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.], entered April 14, 2003) dismissed, without costs.

The revocation was supported by substantial evidence (Matter [129]*129of Trimis v New York City Police Dept., 300 AD2d 162 [2002], lv denied 100 NY2d 503 [2003]) indicating lack of moral character and fitness to possess a firearm (Penal Law § 400.00 [1]; 38 RCNY 5-02), including petitioner’s arrest on theft and fencing charges in New Jersey, resolution of those charges by restitution to the victim, failure to notify the License Division of the arrest for more than a year, and failure to promptly notify the License Division of a robbery at petitioner’s business establishment (38 RCNY 5-22 [c] [1]; 5-30 [c], [d]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Andrias, Williams and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 128, 779 N.Y.S.2d 46, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cerciello-v-kelly-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack