Opinion
March 13, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Fierro, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The petitioner, who was employed as a correction officer starting in 1978, does not challenge the findings of misconduct premised upon his actions when Suffolk County police officers responded to a "domestic dispute". Nor does he challenge the finding that he "knowingly and willingly" entered false and inaccurate information in an official record of the Suffolk County Sheriff's Department during the subsequent investigation of that incident. The petitioner's sole contention is that dismissal is too harsh a penalty. However, this was not the first time that disciplinary charges had been brought and sustained against the petitioner (see, e.g., Matter of Keogh v. Dolce, 84 A.D.2d 579) and his past and present offenses manifest an unwillingness or inability to adapt to the discipline required of a law enforcement officer, both on and off duty (see, Matter of Schembeck v. Village Bd., 110 A.D.2d 1047; cf., Matter of Fox v Finnerty, 62 N.Y.2d 796; Matter of Bal v. Murphy, 43 N.Y.2d 762). In light of all the circumstances, we cannot say that the punishment was so disproportionate to the offense as to shock one's sense of fairness (see, Matter of Williams v. Police Dept., 50 N.Y.2d 956; Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222). Brown, J.P., Eiber, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.