Sheinin v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sheinin v. Kelly

18 A.D.3d 260, 793 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5088

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

DecidedMay 10, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.3d 260 (Sheinin 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

Sheinin v. Kelly, 18 A.D.3d 260, 793 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5088 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent Police Department, dated October 1, 2003, which, after a hearing, revoked petitioner’s premises business pistol license, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Paviola A. Soto, J], entered April 27, 2004) dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence supported the determination to revoke petitioner’s license, including proof that he showed poor judgment on more than one occasion in carrying the weapon, contrary to the restrictions on his license. Under the circumstances, the penalty of revocation was not so disproportionate to this conduct as to shock the conscience (Matter of Gordon v LaCava, 203 AD2d 290 [1994]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Ellerin, Nardelli, Williams and Catterson, JJ.

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

Determination of respondent Police Department, dated October 1, 2003, which, after a hearing, revoked petitioner’s premises business pistol license, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Paviola A. Soto, J], entered April 27, 2004) dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence supported the determination to revoke petitioner’s license, including proof that he showed poor judgment on more than one occasion in carrying the weapon, contrary to the restrictions on his license. Under the circumstances, the penalty of revocation was not so disproportionate to this conduct as to shock the conscience (Matter of Gordon v LaCava, 203 AD2d 290 [1994]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Ellerin, Nardelli, Williams and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.3d 260, 793 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5088, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sheinin-v-kelly-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack