From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Brooks v. Suardy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 11, 1995
222 A.D.2d 502 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

December 11, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenstein, J.).


Ordered that, on the Court's own motion, the appellants' notice of appeal is treated as an application for leave to appeal, and leave to appeal is granted (see, CPLR 5701 [c]); and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the petition is dismissed, and the penalty is confirmed.

The Administrative Law Judge found, in relevant part, that the petitioner, while off duty, threatened to kill a civilian and improperly pointed his off-duty handgun at another civilian, that he possessed an unregistered handgun, that he left both handguns in the trunk of his car, that he was convicted of menacing and fined $500, that he made false statements about the incident to the Internal Affairs Unit, all of which violated the Rules and Regulations of the New York City Transit Police Department (hereinafter the Transit Police Department).

Although the petitioner had no prior disciplinary record, in light of the Administrative Law Judge's findings, the penalty of dismissal is not so disproportionate to the offenses as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222, 231, 234). The petitioner's conduct undermined the integrity and fitness of the Transit Police Department and posed a serious threat to the discipline and efficiency of its operation (see, Matter of Hickey v Bratton, 180 A.D.2d 682, 683; Matter of Steinberg v Dooley, 168 A.D.2d 499). Moreover, in matters involving police misconduct, great deference is accorded to the police department's determinations regarding the appropriate discipline of its members (see, Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436, 445; Richichi v Galligan, 136 A.D.2d 616).

The petitioner's remaining contentions in support of affirmance are without merit. Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenblatt and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Brooks v. Suardy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 11, 1995
222 A.D.2d 502 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Matter of Brooks v. Suardy

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of BRENTON BROOKS, Respondent, v. CARMEN SUARDY et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 11, 1995

Citations

222 A.D.2d 502 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
635 N.Y.S.2d 74

Citing Cases

Matter of Houston v. Village of Haverstraw

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs. The…

Matter of Clavin v. Town of Montgomery

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