Opinion
2022–05076
09-27-2023
In the Matter of John BERISHA, petitioner, v. George E. FUFIDIO, etc., respondent.
The Bellantoni Law Firm, PLLC, Scarsdale, NY (Amy L. Bellantoni of counsel), for petitioner. Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, NY (Anjali Bhat of counsel), for respondent.
The Bellantoni Law Firm, PLLC, Scarsdale, NY (Amy L. Bellantoni of counsel), for petitioner.
Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, NY (Anjali Bhat of counsel), for respondent.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, BARRY E. WARHIT, JJ.
DECISION & JUDGMENT Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent, George E. Fufidio, a Judge of the County Court, Westchester County, dated March 4, 2022, which denied, without a hearing, the petitioner's application to amend his pistol license.
ADJUDGED that the petition is granted, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the determination is annulled, and the matter is remitted to the respondent for a new determination of the petitioner's application to amend his pistol license.
The petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent dated March 4, 2022, denying the petitioner's application to amend his pistol license from one for target shooting to sportsperson with restricted carry. The respondent denied the application on the ground that the petitioner did not establish "proper cause" within the meaning of former Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f).
In light of the determination of the United States Supreme Court in ( New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, ––– U.S. ––––, 142 S.Ct. 2111, 213 L.Ed.2d 387 ), which held that the proper cause standard, under New York law, was unconstitutional as violative of the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution (see Bruen, ––– U.S. ––––, 142 S.Ct. at 2156 ; Matter of Callahan v. City of New York, 208 A.D.3d 422, 173 N.Y.S.3d 243 ), we grant the petition, annul the determination, and remit the matter to the respondent for a new determination of the petitioner's application.
The parties' remaining contentions either are without merit, are improperly raised for the first time in this proceeding, or need not be reached in light of the foregoing.
DUFFY, J.P., CHAMBERS, CHRISTOPHER and WARHIT, JJ., concur.