Opinion
June 27, 1994
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.
The petitioner contends that the determination was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and was not supported by substantial evidence in the record. We find, however, that there was substantial evidence to support the permanent revocation of the petitioner's license, including evidence that the petitioner showed poor judgment by failing to safeguard his weapon while accompanying a Boy Scout troop on a ski trip in upstate New York (see, Matter of Gordon v. LaCava, 203 A.D.2d 290; Matter of Hock v. Scarpino, 185 A.D.2d 237; Matter of Sobus v. Contiguglia, 113 A.D.2d 1027; Matter of Lipton v. Ward, 116 A.D.2d 474; Matter of Goldberg v. Edelstein, 100 A.D.2d 968; Matter of Robinson v. Ward, 181 A.D.2d 585). Contrary to the petitioner's contentions, there was a rational basis for the determination, and therefore the determination cannot be considered arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion (see, Sewell v. City of New York, 182 A.D.2d 469, 472). Furthermore, the hearing was in all respects fair and the Hearing Officer remained impartial throughout. Thus, the petitioner was not denied any due process rights.
We have examined the petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. O'Brien, J.P., Pizzuto, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.