Matter of Logan v Kelly

Matter of Matter of Logan v Kelly 2011 NY Slip Op 08481 Decided on November 22, 2011 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 22, 2011
Moskowitz, J.P., Renwick, DeGrasse, Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
6130 105788/10

[*1]In re Richard Logan, Petitioner,

v

Raymond Kelly, etc., Respondent.




Kevin P. Sheerin, Mineola, for petitioner.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Alyse
Fiori of counsel), for respondent.

Determination of respondent, dated January 5, 2010, which revoked petitioner's Retired Law Enforcement Carry pistol license, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Michael D. Stallman, J.], entered July 8, 2010), dismissed, without costs.

Respondent's determination was supported by substantial evidence (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176 [1978]). Petitioner conceded at the administrative hearing that he failed to immediately notify the License Division upon becoming a party to a Child Protective Services investigation, a party to domestic incident reports, and
when an order of protection was issued against him (see 38 RCNY 5-22[c][8]; 38 RCNY 5-30[c][5], [d]; Matter of Kozhar v Kelly, 62 AD3d 540 [2009]). The revocation of petitioner's license was within respondent's broad discretion regardless of whether the allegations of petitioner's ex-wife, which led to the reportable incidents, were false. Petitioner's contention that his failure to report the incidents were "technical violations," is unavailing (see Matter of Cohen v Kelly, 30 AD3d 170 [2006]).

The penalty imposed does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Del Valle v [*2]Kelly, 37 AD3d 311 [2007]). 38 RCNY 5-22(a)(1) explicitly states that pistol licenses are revocable at any time, and the record shows that petitioner violated the rules governing his pistol license on numerous occasions.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: NOVEMBER 22, 2011

CLERK