Foley v. Dillon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Foley v. Dillon

132 A.D.2d 932, 518 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49383

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

DecidedJuly 10, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 132 A.D.2d 932 (Foley v. Dillon) 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

Foley v. Dillon, 132 A.D.2d 932, 518 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49383 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and petition dismissed. Memorandum: The New York State Board of Parole (Board) appeals from a judgment which granted petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus. The court held that the Board’s revocation of petitioner’s parole was based upon testimony contained in a parole officer’s case summary which was not received in evidence at the parole revocation hearing (see, NYCRR 8005.18). Inasmuch as three of the four sustained violations were supported by evidence other than contained in the case summary, petitioner’s parole was properly revoked (see, People ex rel. Manton v Von Holden, 86 AD2d 967, 968, lv denied 56 NY2d 505). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Gorman, J.—habeas corpus.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and petition dismissed. Memorandum: The New York State Board of Parole (Board) appeals from a judgment which granted petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus. The court held that the Board’s revocation of petitioner’s parole was based upon testimony contained in a parole officer’s case summary which was not received in evidence at the parole revocation hearing (see, NYCRR 8005.18). Inasmuch as three of the four sustained violations were supported by evidence other than contained in the case summary, petitioner’s parole was properly revoked (see, People ex rel. Manton v Von Holden, 86 AD2d 967, 968, lv denied 56 NY2d 505). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Gorman, J.—habeas corpus.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.2d 932, 518 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foley-v-dillon-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack