Begun v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Begun v. Goord

694 N.E.2d 876, 249 A.D.2d 861, 671 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4819

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

DecidedApril 30, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 694 N.E.2d 876 (Begun v. Goord) 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

Begun v. Goord, 694 N.E.2d 876, 249 A.D.2d 861, 671 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4819 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Kane, J.), entered September 8,1997 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review, inter alia, a determination of respondent permitting the appropriation of petitioner’s inmate funds to repay mandatory surcharges.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, initiated this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge the appropriation of funds from his prison account to satisfy two mandatory surcharges imposed as the result of the criminal convictions for which he was incarcerated. We affirm Supreme Court’s dismissal of the petition. Penal Law § 60.35 (5) (a) authorizes the collection of mandatory surcharges from, inter alia, funds from outside sources that have been deposited in the inmate’s prison account. Prison Directive 2788 (III) (B) (2) (b) (2) further provides that an inmate, such as petitioner, who has two outstanding encumbrances, must surrender 40% of his earned wages and all outside funds sent to the facility on his behalf for the purpose of repayment. We conclude that the petition challenging this practice and its enabling legislation was properly dismissed (see, People v Arthur, 234 AD2d 792, 793).

Crew III, J. P., White, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Kane, J.), entered September 8,1997 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review, inter alia, a determination of respondent permitting the appropriation of petitioner’s inmate funds to repay mandatory surcharges.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, initiated this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge the appropriation of funds from his prison account to satisfy two mandatory surcharges imposed as the result of the criminal convictions for which he was incarcerated. We affirm Supreme Court’s dismissal of the petition. Penal Law § 60.35 (5) (a) authorizes the collection of mandatory surcharges from, inter alia, funds from outside sources that have been deposited in the inmate’s prison account. Prison Directive 2788 (III) (B) (2) (b) (2) further provides that an inmate, such as petitioner, who has two outstanding encumbrances, must surrender 40% of his earned wages and all outside funds sent to the facility on his behalf for the purpose of repayment. We conclude that the petition challenging this practice and its enabling legislation was properly dismissed (see, People v Arthur, 234 AD2d 792, 793).

Crew III, J. P., White, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

694 N.E.2d 876, 249 A.D.2d 861, 671 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4819, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/begun-v-goord-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack