Guzman v. Dennison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Guzman v. Dennison

32 A.D.3d 798, 821 N.Y.S.2d 208

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

DecidedSeptember 28, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 32 A.D.3d 798 (Guzman v. Dennison) 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

Guzman v. Dennison, 32 A.D.3d 798, 821 N.Y.S.2d 208 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, [799]*799New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), entered December 30, 2005, which denied petitioner’s application to annul respondent’s denial of parole and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While petitioner’s prison record is commendable, respondent’s denial of parole based on the serious and violent nature of his offense is not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Silmon v Travis, 95 NY2d 470, 476-477 [2000]; People ex rel. Herbert v New York State Bd. of Parole, 97 AD2d 128, 133 [1983]). Respondent did find “some aggravating circumstances beyond the inherent seriousness of the crime itself’ (Matter of King v New York State Div. of Parole, 190 AD2d 423, 433 [1993], affd 83 NY2d 788 [1994]), e.g., that petitioner was on parole when he committed the crime. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Nardelli and McGuire, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, [799]*799New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), entered December 30, 2005, which denied petitioner’s application to annul respondent’s denial of parole and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While petitioner’s prison record is commendable, respondent’s denial of parole based on the serious and violent nature of his offense is not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Silmon v Travis, 95 NY2d 470, 476-477 [2000]; People ex rel. Herbert v New York State Bd. of Parole, 97 AD2d 128, 133 [1983]). Respondent did find “some aggravating circumstances beyond the inherent seriousness of the crime itself’ (Matter of King v New York State Div. of Parole, 190 AD2d 423, 433 [1993], affd 83 NY2d 788 [1994]), e.g., that petitioner was on parole when he committed the crime. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Nardelli and McGuire, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 A.D.3d 798, 821 N.Y.S.2d 208, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/guzman-v-dennison-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack