Almeyda v. New York State Division of Parole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Almeyda v. New York State Division of Parole

4 A.D.3d 525, 771 N.Y.S.2d 722

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Almeyda v. New York State Division of Parole. Read the opinion of the Court — 290 A.D.2d 505 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 23, 2004·Published

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Division of Parole dated April 17, 2002, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s request to be released on parole, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter Patsalos, J.), dated January 3, 2003, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The respondents acted in accordance with statutory requirements in denying the petitioner’s request to be released on parole. Accordingly, the discretionary denial of parole is not subject to judicial review (see Executive Law § 259-i [5]; Matter of Almeyda v New York State Div. of Parole, 269 AD2d 393 [2000]; Matter of Bouknight v Russi, 242 AD2d 329 [1997]).

The petitioner’s remaining contention is without merit. Prudenti, PJ., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Division of Parole dated April 17, 2002, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s request to be released on parole, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter Patsalos, J.), dated January 3, 2003, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The respondents acted in accordance with statutory requirements in denying the petitioner’s request to be released on parole. Accordingly, the discretionary denial of parole is not subject to judicial review (see Executive Law § 259-i [5]; Matter of Almeyda v New York State Div. of Parole, 269 AD2d 393 [2000]; Matter of Bouknight v Russi, 242 AD2d 329 [1997]).

The petitioner’s remaining contention is without merit. Prudenti, PJ., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Almeyda v. New York State Division of Parole, 4 A.D.3d 525, 771 N.Y.S.2d 722 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

4 A.D.3d 525 (Almeyda v. New York State Division of Parole) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related