Murphy v. Kerik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Murphy v. Kerik

303 A.D.2d 187, 755 N.Y.S.2d 244, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2216

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

DecidedMarch 6, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 303 A.D.2d 187 (Murphy v. Kerik) 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

Murphy v. Kerik, 303 A.D.2d 187, 755 N.Y.S.2d 244, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2216 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent Police Commissioner, dated April 2, 2001, finding that petitioner abused his authority as a police officer by arresting the complainant without probable cause and used excessive force against the complainant, and imposing a 15-day suspension without pay, 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 [Walter Tolub, J.], entered April 10, 2002), dismissed, without costs.

Respondent’s findings are supported by substantial evidence, namely, the recorded statements of the complainant and four eyewitnesses made in interviews with the Civilian Complaint Review Board (see Matter of Saunders v City of New York, 273 AD2d 103 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 766 [2000]). No basis exists to disturb respondent’s findings of credibility (see id.). The penalty does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32, 39-40 [2001]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Buckley, Rosenberger, Williams and Friedman, JJ.

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

Determination of respondent Police Commissioner, dated April 2, 2001, finding that petitioner abused his authority as a police officer by arresting the complainant without probable cause and used excessive force against the complainant, and imposing a 15-day suspension without pay, 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 [Walter Tolub, J.], entered April 10, 2002), dismissed, without costs.

Respondent’s findings are supported by substantial evidence, namely, the recorded statements of the complainant and four eyewitnesses made in interviews with the Civilian Complaint Review Board (see Matter of Saunders v City of New York, 273 AD2d 103 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 766 [2000]). No basis exists to disturb respondent’s findings of credibility (see id.). The penalty does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32, 39-40 [2001]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Buckley, Rosenberger, Williams and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 187, 755 N.Y.S.2d 244, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-kerik-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack