Adams v. New York State Division of Parole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Adams v. New York State Division of Parole

89 A.D.3d 1267, 932 N.Y.2d 388

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 10, 2011

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 89 A.D.3d 1267 (Adams v. New York State Division of Parole) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adams v. New York State Division of Parole, 89 A.D.3d 1267, 932 N.Y.2d 388 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Petitioner was convicted in June 2004 of arson in the third degree and was sentenced to a prison term of 5 to 15 years. He was thereafter released to parole supervision in January 2008. Petitioner was arrested in August 2009 and, at a September 2009 parole revocation hearing, he pleaded guilty to failing to submit to drug and alcohol testing upon demand; his parole was revoked and a 24-month hold was imposed. Petitioner then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding contending that the time assessment imposed was excessive. Supreme Court dismissed the petition and petitioner now appeals.

This Court has been advised by the Attorney General that, [1268]*1268during the pendency of this appeal, petitioner was released to parole supervision in August 2011. Because he is no longer incarcerated and his challenge was solely to the length of the time assessment imposed, the appeal is moot and must be dismissed (see People ex rel. Phillips v LaClair, 84 AD3d 1606 [2011]; Matter of Smith v Vann, 53 AD3d 945 [2008]).

Rose, J.E, Lahtinen, Malone Jr., McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Petitioner was convicted in June 2004 of arson in the third degree and was sentenced to a prison term of 5 to 15 years. He was thereafter released to parole supervision in January 2008. Petitioner was arrested in August 2009 and, at a September 2009 parole revocation hearing, he pleaded guilty to failing to submit to drug and alcohol testing upon demand; his parole was revoked and a 24-month hold was imposed. Petitioner then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding contending that the time assessment imposed was excessive. Supreme Court dismissed the petition and petitioner now appeals.

This Court has been advised by the Attorney General that, [1268]*1268during the pendency of this appeal, petitioner was released to parole supervision in August 2011. Because he is no longer incarcerated and his challenge was solely to the length of the time assessment imposed, the appeal is moot and must be dismissed (see People ex rel. Phillips v LaClair, 84 AD3d 1606 [2011]; Matter of Smith v Vann, 53 AD3d 945 [2008]).

Rose, J.E, Lahtinen, Malone Jr., McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 A.D.3d 1267, 932 N.Y.2d 388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-new-york-state-division-of-parole-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack