D'Onofrio v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

D'Onofrio v. Kelly

22 A.D.3d 343, 802 N.Y.S.2d 159

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

DecidedOctober 18, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.D.3d 343 (D'Onofrio 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

D'Onofrio v. Kelly, 22 A.D.3d 343, 802 N.Y.S.2d 159 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sherry Klein Heitler, J), entered August 17, 2004, which denied petitioner’s application to annul respondent Police Commissioner’s revocation of petitioner’s premises residence pistol license and rifle/ shotgun permit, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding that petitioner, a civilian employee of the New York City Police Department, violated the terms of his pistol license is rationally supported by petitioner’s admission that for eight hours while at work, he left the pistol in the trunk of his car in violation of 38 RCNY 5-22 (a) (12). Live ammunition was also found in the car. The penalty of revocation does not shock our sense of fairness, even if, as petitioner asserts, he planned to go to a firing range after work (see 38 RCNY 5-23 [a] [3] [licensee may transport her/his handguns “directly to and from” a small arms range, ammunition to be carried separately]), and even though his car was parked on police premises. As the IAS court stated, “an eight hour stopover for work is not a de minimis detour” (see Matter of Gordon v LaCava, 203 AD2d 290, 291 [1994]). Concur—Marlow, J.P., Ellerin, Williams, Catterson and McGuire, JJ. [See 4 Misc 3d 1016(A), 2004 NY Slip Op 5091KU) (2004).]

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sherry Klein Heitler, J), entered August 17, 2004, which denied petitioner’s application to annul respondent Police Commissioner’s revocation of petitioner’s premises residence pistol license and rifle/ shotgun permit, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding that petitioner, a civilian employee of the New York City Police Department, violated the terms of his pistol license is rationally supported by petitioner’s admission that for eight hours while at work, he left the pistol in the trunk of his car in violation of 38 RCNY 5-22 (a) (12). Live ammunition was also found in the car. The penalty of revocation does not shock our sense of fairness, even if, as petitioner asserts, he planned to go to a firing range after work (see 38 RCNY 5-23 [a] [3] [licensee may transport her/his handguns “directly to and from” a small arms range, ammunition to be carried separately]), and even though his car was parked on police premises. As the IAS court stated, “an eight hour stopover for work is not a de minimis detour” (see Matter of Gordon v LaCava, 203 AD2d 290, 291 [1994]). Concur—Marlow, J.P., Ellerin, Williams, Catterson and McGuire, JJ. [See 4 Misc 3d 1016(A), 2004 NY Slip Op 5091KU) (2004).]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.3d 343, 802 N.Y.S.2d 159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donofrio-v-kelly-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack