Mickle v. Frank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mickle v. Frank

51 A.D.2d 727, 379 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11210

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 2, 1976·Published

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review respondent’s determination, contained in his Order No. 50, dated July 8, 1975 and made after petitioner’s plea of guilty to certain specifications, which fined petitioner 40 days’ pay. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. In our opinion, the penalty imposed is not so shockingly disproportionate to the offenses committed as to require, or permit, this court to reduce it (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, 34 NY2d 222). Martuscello, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Margett, Damiani and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review respondent’s determination, contained in his Order No. 50, dated July 8, 1975 and made after petitioner’s plea of guilty to certain specifications, which fined petitioner 40 days’ pay. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. In our opinion, the penalty imposed is not so shockingly disproportionate to the offenses committed as to require, or permit, this court to reduce it (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, 34 NY2d 222). Martuscello, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Margett, Damiani and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Mickle v. Frank, 51 A.D.2d 727, 379 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11210 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

51 A.D.2d 727 (Mickle v. Frank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.