Opinion
5753 Index 100599/16
02-20-2018
In re Christos KOUTENTIS, Petitioner–Appellant, v. NYC POLICE DEPARTMENT, LICENSING DIVISION, Respondent–Respondent.
Law Office of Bernard V. Kleinman, PLLC, Somers (Bernard V. Kleinman of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Elina Druker of counsel), for respondent.
Law Office of Bernard V. Kleinman, PLLC, Somers (Bernard V. Kleinman of counsel), for appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Elina Druker of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, J.P., Richter, Manzanet–Daniels, Andrias, Gesmer, JJ.
Determination of respondent, dated February 11, 2016, which, after a hearing, revoked petitioner's premises handgun license, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order, Supreme Court, New York County [Barbara Jaffe, J.], entered October 17, 2016), dismissed, without costs.
Respondent's determination is supported by substantial evidence (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 180–181, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183 [1978] ). The record shows that petitioner neglected to report multiple domestic violence incidents, failed to properly safeguard his guns as the registered address was not his primary residence, failed to cooperate with the Licensing Division's investigation, and did not maintain familiarity with applicable rules (see e.g. Matter of Verges v. Bratton, 128 A.D.3d 602, 11 N.Y.S.3d 115 [1st Dept. 2015] ; Matter of Kozhar v. Kelly, 62 A.D.3d 540, 882 N.Y.S.2d 399 [1st Dept. 2009] ). Petitioner's arguments that the Hearing Officer was biased, and that revocation violated his Second Amendment rights, are unpreserved, as they were not raised at the hearing (see Matter of Striplin v. Selsky, 28 A.D.3d 969, 812 N.Y.S.2d 722 [3d Dept. 2006] ), and are also unavailing (see Matter of Delgado v. Kelly, 127 A.D.3d 644, 8 N.Y.S.3d 172 [1st Dept. 2015], lv denied 26 N.Y.3d 905, 2015 WL 5445688 [2015] ).
The revocation of petitioner's premises handgun license does not shock our sense of fairness (see Verges at 602, 11 N.Y.S.3d 115 ).