Opinion
February 7, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County [David Levy, J.].
Substantial evidence that petitioner violated Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) was provided by the undercover officer's testimony that his partner, an undercover police cadet, was served an alcoholic beverage by petitioner's bartender without being asked for identification, and the cadet's police identification card showing that he was only 20 years old at the time. The penalty does not shock our sense of fairness, especially since this was petitioner's second violation of section 65 (1) within six months.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger and Ross, JJ.