Opinion
February 7, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County [William McCooe, J.].
Petitioner's own testimony, when compared to the transcript of the Grand Jury proceedings, provides a rational basis for the finding that petitioner's testimony before the Grand Jury was false, as petitioner could not have seen the contents of the wallet or I.D. folder in question when he entered the apartment at the time of the arrest. The ultimate determination, therefore, is supported by substantial evidence (300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 182; see also, Matter of Berenhaus v. Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436, 443).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger and Ross, JJ.