Bell v. Posillico

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bell v. Posillico

213 A.D.2d 959, 624 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3336

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

DecidedMarch 30, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 213 A.D.2d 959 (Bell v. Posillico) 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

Bell v. Posillico, 213 A.D.2d 959, 624 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3336 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Harris, J.), entered August 16, 1994 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s request to participate in a temporary work release program.

Petitioner challenges respondent’s denial of his request for permission to participate in a temporary work release program from prison. Our review of the record reveals, however, that petitioner has failed to establish that respondent’s denial violated any laws or deprived petitioner of any constitutional right. Moreover, in light of the serious nature of petitioner’s past criminal history, we cannot conclude that the denial of his request was irrational. While petitioner may be eligible for temporary release consideration, he is not conclusively entitled to this privilege.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, 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 (Harris, J.), entered August 16, 1994 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s request to participate in a temporary work release program.

Petitioner challenges respondent’s denial of his request for permission to participate in a temporary work release program from prison. Our review of the record reveals, however, that petitioner has failed to establish that respondent’s denial violated any laws or deprived petitioner of any constitutional right. Moreover, in light of the serious nature of petitioner’s past criminal history, we cannot conclude that the denial of his request was irrational. While petitioner may be eligible for temporary release consideration, he is not conclusively entitled to this privilege.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

213 A.D.2d 959, 624 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-posillico-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack