By Michele Evans / NYweeklyRecord.com / Date: 10/19/2026
Category: Criminal Courts / Judicial Accountability / Public Safety
NEW YORK CITY, NY –
A New York City Criminal Court judge has been publicly censured after the state judicial watchdog found that he brought his personal gun into a Manhattan courtroom, left it unsecured near his feet and misled a police witness during what he called an experiment.
The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct announced the discipline against Judge Jeffrey A. Gershuny on October 13. The commission found that Gershuny intentionally deceived an NYPD officer who was testifying at an August 2025 suppression hearing about how he recognized a gun inside a shopping bag.
Gershuny was deciding whether police had lawfully searched a defendant’s bag and whether the recovered weapon could be used as evidence. During a break, the judge retrieved his licensed pistol, a shopping bag and a stapler. He removed the magazine and asked a court officer to confirm the gun was unloaded.
A supervisor advised against the plan, according to the commission. Gershuny went forward. He displayed the pistol, told the witness he was placing it in the bag, then secretly left the gun near his foot and put the stapler in the bag instead.
The judge repeatedly told the officer that a firearm was inside as he asked the witness to explain how he could see it. The officer would not say he could identify a gun through the bag. Only after the questioning ended did Gershuny reveal the switch to the witness and lawyers.
The commission said the experiment influenced Gershuny’s decision to suppress the gun in the criminal case. Prosecutors then declined to continue the prosecution. The watchdog did not accuse the judge of a crime. It found that his deception and failure to safeguard the weapon violated judicial ethics and damaged confidence in the courts.
The incident reached beyond courtroom theater. A suppression hearing tests whether police respected constitutional limits. A judge may examine the evidence and question witnesses, but the process depends on a neutral record that both sides can challenge. The commission found that Gershuny created his own demonstration, overruled a prosecutor’s objection and used a concealed substitution to test a witness.
The firearm presented a separate safety problem. Judges with licensed firearms may carry them in certain New York City courthouses, but the weapon must remain concealed and safeguarded. The commission said Gershuny left his pistol on the floor by his foot while the bag was raised in court.
Gershuny agreed to the censure and acknowledged that his conduct was improper. The commission said he was apologetic, cooperative and had no prior disciplinary record. It also noted that he stopped bringing the gun into the courtroom after the incident.
Censure is a formal public sanction. It does not remove Gershuny from the bench. The commission urged the Office of Court Administration to review the firearm rules and make sure judges understand their obligations.
The unanswered question is institutional. Court officials have not publicly said whether courthouse procedures changed after the incident, whether judges received new weapons guidance or whether a similar unscripted demonstration could happen again. Accountability requires more than recording one judge’s mistake. It requires closing the gap that allowed it.
Sources
New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct: Jeffrey A. Gershuny Determination
Gothamist: A NYC Judge Brought His Gun Into Court for an Experiment. Now He’s Censured.
Leave a Reply