People v Sande

[*1] People v Sande 2010 NY Slip Op 50241(U) [26 Misc 3d 1224(A)] Decided on February 17, 2010 Supreme Court, Kings County D'Emic, J. Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on February 17, 2010
Supreme Court, Kings County

The People of the State of New York

against

Thomas Sande, Defendant.



8263-1991



Attorney for the Defendant:

Matthew Saliba, Esq.

Newman & Okun

8 West 38th Street, 9th Floor

New York, NY 10018

(212)-964-7600

Department of Probation:

Theresa Lizzio, Esq.

210 Joralemon Street, 10th Floor

Brooklyn, NY 11201

(718)-802-4416

Matthew J. D'Emic, J.

The defendant, a former probationer, petitions the court for a certificate of relief from civil disabilities pursuant to Correction Law §702. He is requesting the certificate "for the limited purpose of obtaining a NYS firearms permit relative to my collection of antique firearms."

The Department of Probation opposes the application stating that, although the defendant is eligible since he only has one felony conviction, it "strongly recommends against the applicant being issued a Certificate or Relief for purposes of gun ownership/possession." A prior application for this relief was denied on April 6, 1998.

The application is denied.

On October 29, 1991, the defendant was sentenced to five years probation on his plea to Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Fifth Degree. Although he was favorably [*2]discharged from probation on November 9, 1993, he later pled guilty in Suffolk County to Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Fourth Degree.

On July 17, 1998, he was sentenced to three years probation from which he was favorably discharged on March 5, 2001.

Admirably, this defendant has maintained steady employment, is raising a family and has refrained from drug abuse since that time. Although he has one felony conviction, two misdemeanor convictions, two violations and an infraction, he has stayed out of trouble for over twenty years.

Nevertheless, the court is at a loss to understand how the possession of an antique gun collection is consistent with the defendant's rehabilitation or in the public interest, as set forth in the defendant's application in support of this application. Correction Law §702(2) only allows a court to grant a certificate of relief to an eligible offender on those two conditions. In this case, the defendant has rebuilt his life without a firearms permit and his rehabilitation seems complete. In addition, under the circumstances presented, the granting of the requested relief is inconsistent with the public interest.

This constitutes the Decision and Order of the court.

____________________________

Matthew J. D'Emic

J.S.C.