Opinion
March 1, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (William P. McCooe, J.).
In reviewing the record, we find that there was substantial evidence to support the Commissioner's determination that petitioner, while acting in concert with other police officers, wrongfully and without just cause entered a store, took possession of a quantity of food stamps without vouchering the same, and failed to notify his superiors of the theft of property committed in his presence by fellow police officers (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176). Petitioner's contention that evidentiary sources of questionable character must be corroborated by other reliable evidence is misplaced especially where, as here, the Hearing Officer has credited the testimony of the Department's sole eyewitness and its one informant (see, Matter of Kelly v Murphy, 20 N.Y.2d 205). Moreover, it is for the administrative tribunal, not the courts, to weigh conflicting evidence, assess the credibility of witnesses, and determine which testimony to accept and which to reject (Matter of Silberfarb v Board of Coop. Educ. Servs., 60 N.Y.2d 979, 981). In any event, the testimony given by the Department's witnesses was corroborated by independent evidence in the form of a tape-recorded conversation which implicated petitioner as a participant in the store breakin and theft.
In view of the fact that petitioner was found guilty of multiple charges and specifications which alleged conduct of a criminal nature, the sanction 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).
Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Asch, Wallach, Smith and Rubin, JJ.