Reid v. State of New York Executive Department

208 A.D.2d 747, 617 N.Y.S.2d 510, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9873
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 17, 1994
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 208 A.D.2d 747 (Reid v. State of New York Executive 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
Reid v. State of New York Executive Department, 208 A.D.2d 747, 617 N.Y.S.2d 510, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Superintendent of the New York State Police, dated August 20, 1992, which, after a hearing, found the petitioner guilty of three charges of misconduct and dismissed him from his position as a New York State Trooper.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

We find no merit to the petitioner’s contention that the statement he gave on November 20, 1991, during an interview with State Police investigators, was inadmissible at the administrative hearing because he was not represented by counsel at the interview. The record establishes that the interview was an ordinary supervisory inquiry and it was therefore not governed by the procedural requirements of section 16.2 (A) (8) of the collective bargaining agreement (see, Matter of Roman v Constantine, 185 AD2d 701).

[748]*748The hearing board’s findings of guilt as to the three charges levied against the petitioner are supported by substantial evidence (see, CPLR 7803 [4]; see also, Matter of Boyd v Constantine, 81 NY2d 189, 196, quoting 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180). Finally, the penalty imposed is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Costa v. McMahon
225 A.D.2d 694 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
208 A.D.2d 747, 617 N.Y.S.2d 510, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reid-v-state-of-new-york-executive-department-nyappdiv-1994.