Babchak v. Russi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Babchak v. Russi

199 A.D.2d 657, 605 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11811

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

DecidedDecember 9, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 199 A.D.2d 657 (Babchak v. Russi) 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

Babchak v. Russi, 199 A.D.2d 657, 605 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11811 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which revoked petitioner’s parole.

We have examined petitioner’s claim that the determination revoking his parole was not supported by substantial evidence and we find it to be without merit. While petitioner asserts that the evidence against him presented by his wife at the hearing was not believable, it was for respondent to finally determine all credibility issues. Finally, we conclude that it was not an abuse of discretion in this case for respondent to determine that petitioner should not be considered for reparóle for five years.

Weiss, P. J., Crew III, Cardona, White and Casey, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which revoked petitioner’s parole.

We have examined petitioner’s claim that the determination revoking his parole was not supported by substantial evidence and we find it to be without merit. While petitioner asserts that the evidence against him presented by his wife at the hearing was not believable, it was for respondent to finally determine all credibility issues. Finally, we conclude that it was not an abuse of discretion in this case for respondent to determine that petitioner should not be considered for reparóle for five years.

Weiss, P. J., Crew III, Cardona, White and Casey, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 A.D.2d 657, 605 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11811, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/babchak-v-russi-nyappdiv-1993.