Opinion
December 4, 1995
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.
Initially, we note that inasmuch as the petition did not raise a substantial evidence question, the matter was improperly transferred to the Appellate Division (see, CPLR 7804 [g]). However, in the interest of judicial economy, we elect to retain jurisdiction and determine the issue raised on the merits (see, e.g., Matter of 125 Bar Corp. v State Liq. Auth., 24 N.Y.2d 174; Matter of Sharon Towers Realty v New York State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, 201 A.D.2d 976).
Turning to the merits, we find that the petitioner's conduct, arising from an off-duty incident in which he struck a civilian and improperly displayed his weapon, cannot be countenanced. "[Such] behavior poses a serious threat to the confidence the public must hold in the police force" (Matter of Hickey v Bratton, 180 A.D.2d 682, 683; see also, Matter of Alfieri v Murphy, 38 N.Y.2d 976). Moreover, the petitioner's admitted false denials to his superiors about the details of this incident, and his failure to disclose the fact that his driver's license had been suspended, evinces a willingness to deceive which is injurious to the integrity of the entire department (see, Matter of Ruggio v Hammill, 207 A.D.2d 991).
Accordingly, given the grave nature of the petitioner's offenses, as well as his prior poor disciplinary record, the penalty of dismissal was not so disproportionate as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222). Santucci, J.P., Altman, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.