FIREARM LICENSING CASES
OTHER LICENSING CASES
CRIMINAL LAW WEAPON CASES
A Long Island resident was arrested on 23 armed felony counts of criminal possession of assault weapons, 10 other counts of armed felony weapons possession, criminal sale of a firearm, and several related felony charges. He was facing numerous mandatory minimum prison sentences. The case was set for indictment, but much negotiation with the District Attorney’s office ended with a single plea to criminal possession of a weapon, and a sentence of probation.

An off-duty United States Marine Corps Reserve Sergeant was arrested in New York City for possession of ammunition for use in an AR-15 rifle. After consultations with the District Attorney’s Office, the case was dismissed.

A Brooklyn resident was charged with criminal possession of a weapon when caught carrying his licensed target pistol other than to-and-from the shooting range. While originally intending to prosecute, after Mr. Levine filed a motion to dismiss, the District Attorney agreed to dismiss the case.

A resident of Texas was arrested for felony criminal possession of a weapon in New York City. The charge carried a 3½ year mandatory prison term, but after speaking with counsel for the District Attorney, the charge was reduced to a misdemeanor. No prison sentence was imposed.

A New York City resident was arrested at LaGuardia Airport for illegal possession of shotguns. The resident did not have a New York City Rifle/Shotgun Permit, and was not lawfully allowed to possess the guns. However, after Mr. Levine’s argument before the Criminal Court, the case was dismissed.

A resident of California was arrested for possession of a loaded handgun. A mandatory term of imprisonment was required if convicted, but successful negotiations with the District Attorney’s office resulted in a plea to a single misdemeanor charge. There was no prison sentence ordered by the Court.

A Florida resident was arrested for felony handgun possession in New York City. The charge subjected the defendant to a mandatory prison sentence upon conviction, and there was no question about his guilt. Nonetheless, after meeting with the District Attorney’s office, it was agreed that the charge would be reduced to a misdemeanor, and if the defendant stayed out of trouble for six months, the charge would be dismissed.

A New York City resident was arrested for felony possession of assault rifles and other restricted weapons. No doubt existed about the defendant’s illegal possession, and each assault weapon charge could result in 3½ years mandatory imprisonment. However, after consultation with the District Attorney’s office, including discussion about certain important weaknesses in the prosecution case, the charges were dismissed.

FIREARM LICENSING CASES
A pistol license applicant, who had been arrested years earlier on charges of trespass and drug possession, was denied a firearm license by the Police Commissioner solely because of the fact of his arrests. In this first ever case of its kind, argued by Mr. Levine, the Court ruled that an arrest alone could not be the basis for denial of a pistol license.

The Police Commissioner denied the pistol license application of a man who previously had been arrested for criminal mischief, criminal trespass and harassment. The criminal case had resulted in a plea to disorderly conduct. Upon Mr. Levine’s filing of an Article 78 proceeding, the Court in the licensing case ruled that the applicant’s earlier plea had been made at the urging of his counsel, and that the facts of the case were of a relatively minor, non-violent nature. Upon remand to the N.Y.P.D., the Commissioner issued the license.

A pistol license applicant was arrested years earlier on charges of assault and petit larceny. The case was dismissed, and his record was wiped clean. On the later license application, he answered "no" to a question about prior arrests. The Police Commissioner denied the license on grounds that the applicant had lied about his prior arrest record. Mr. Levine presented this first case of its kind before the Court, and the Court found that the applicant was entitled to deny the fact of his arrest as the dismissal of the criminal case placed him in the same position as if he never had been arrested.

A New York City Transit Authority Collecting Agent was disapproved for a pistol license when she denied having any arrest history, although she had been arrested 17 years earlier on minor charges, including marijuana possession. The Court, initially, ruled in favor of the Police Commissioner, and against the applicant who had represented herself in Court. However, after hearing about the decision, Mr. Levine contacted the applicant, and filed a rarely granted motion for reargument. Citing previous caselaw precedent, Mr. Levine convinced the Court that the Police Commissioner could not use the applicant’s arrest denial as a basis for disapproving the license. The Court reversed its earlier decision.

The Police Department had refused to issue a carry pistol license to a New York doctor, even though such licenses routinely had been issued in the past to other similar doctors. Access to data from other doctors’ licensing files would prove the Department’s unequal treatment, but a 1994 law made obtaining such information almost impossible, and two attorneys in two previous lawsuits had failed to break through the 1994 law. In Court, Mr. Levine used a more successful legal argument, and won approval to access the data. The Department appealed, but the Appellate Justices unanimously affirmed the precedent established in the lower Court by Mr. Levine. Upon being forced to hand over the records, the Department surrendered, and gave the doctor his carry license.

A pistol license was denied to a security guard applicant, who, in reporting about his fifteen year old arrest on minor charges, could not remember the precise circumstances of the arrest. The Police Commissioner regarded the applicant’s clouded memory as dishonesty. Mr. Levine sued on behalf of the applicant, and the Court ruled that the Commissioner had abused his discretion by denying the license.

The N.Y.P.D. regularly had issued carry pistol licenses to retired New York City Sanitation Police Officers, but after an alleged change in policy, it disapproved the application of a newly retired Officer. The City claimed that the policy change allowed different treatment of the new retiree, however, Mr. Levine proved conclusively in Court that not only had other similar retirees been issued renewal licenses after the date of the policy change, other recently retired officers had been given licenses as well. The Court then reversed the license disapproval.

OTHER LICENSING CASES
A New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission Inspector needed to obtain a Special Patrolman (Peace Officer) designation to keep his job, but he was denied by the N.Y.P.D. because, years before, he had failed the psychological examination for Police Officer. After Mr. Levine’s filing of an Article 78 proceeding, settlement negotiations ended with the client receiving Special Patrolman status.

As a condition of employment, School Safety Officers must hold Special Patrolman status. An S.S.O. applicant was disapproved by the Police Commissioner on grounds that she had been twice arrested and indicted, first on a charge of attempted murder, and later for aggravated assault. The Commissioner also claimed that the applicant had lied when, while disclosing all relevant facts, she mentioned only one of the earlier arrests on her Patrolman application form. This disapproval occurred even though the prior criminal allegations were false, and both indictments were dismissed. Upon denial of the Patrolman designation, Mr. Levine filed a lawsuit and argued that the confusing nature of the arrests and indictments (all of which came from the same set of accusations) caused the applicant to believe that she had been arrested only once on both charges. The Court agreed, and reversed the Commissioner’s decision.

A retired U.S. Customs Inspector had twelve years of service, including undercover surveillance and investigation of drug trafficking. Nonetheless, the New York Department of State, Division of Licensing Services denied him a Private Investigator license, finding that he lacked sufficient investigation experience. An appeal was made to an Administrative Law Judge, and after presentation of the case by Mr. Levine, the Judge ordered the license to be issued.
