Johnson v. New York State Division of Parole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Johnson v. New York State Division of Parole

228 A.D.2d 748, 643 N.Y.2d 427, 643 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6400

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

DecidedJune 6, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 228 A.D.2d 748 (Johnson v. New York State Division of Parole) 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

Johnson v. New York State Division of Parole, 228 A.D.2d 748, 643 N.Y.2d 427, 643 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6400 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Petitioner is currently serving time in prison having been convicted of the crimes of rape in the first degree, rape in the third degree and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. He commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination by respondent denying his October 1994 request for parole. Supreme Court, finding that the determination was neither arbitrary nor capricious, dismissed the petition.

Based upon our review of the record, we find that Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition. Among the factors respondent considered in denying petitioner’s request for parole were the seriousness of the crimes for which petitioner was [749]*749incarcerated, the fact that he was a parole absconder at the time of committing the subject crimes and petitioner’s many felony convictions. These were appropriate factors for respondent to consider and support its conclusion that petitioner could not, if released, remain at liberty without violating the law and that his release was not compatible with the welfare of society (see, Executive Law § 259-i [2] [c]; see also, Matter of Sinopoli v New York State Bd. of Parole, 189 AD2d 960). Accordingly, there is no basis for disturbing respondent’s determination.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, 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

Petitioner is currently serving time in prison having been convicted of the crimes of rape in the first degree, rape in the third degree and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. He commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination by respondent denying his October 1994 request for parole. Supreme Court, finding that the determination was neither arbitrary nor capricious, dismissed the petition.

Based upon our review of the record, we find that Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition. Among the factors respondent considered in denying petitioner’s request for parole were the seriousness of the crimes for which petitioner was [749]*749incarcerated, the fact that he was a parole absconder at the time of committing the subject crimes and petitioner’s many felony convictions. These were appropriate factors for respondent to consider and support its conclusion that petitioner could not, if released, remain at liberty without violating the law and that his release was not compatible with the welfare of society (see, Executive Law § 259-i [2] [c]; see also, Matter of Sinopoli v New York State Bd. of Parole, 189 AD2d 960). Accordingly, there is no basis for disturbing respondent’s determination.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

228 A.D.2d 748, 643 N.Y.2d 427, 643 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-new-york-state-division-of-parole-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack