Marcelin v. Travis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Marcelin v. Travis

288 A.D.2d 718, 732 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11147

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

DecidedNovember 21, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 288 A.D.2d 718 (Marcelin v. Travis) 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

Marcelin v. Travis, 288 A.D.2d 718, 732 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11147 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the [719]*719Supreme Court (Keegan, J.), entered December 12, 2000 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Parole denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Petitioner has reappeared before the Board of Parole since the parole release determination giving rise to this proceeding and his request for parole release has again been denied. Given petitioner’s subsequent appearance before the Board, the instant matter is now moot and must be dismissed (see, Matter of Bermudez v New York State Div. of Parole, 281 AD2d 673). Were we to reach the merits of the petition, we would find that the Board’s 1999 determination is neither arbitrary nor capricious and is supported by substantial evidence.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of the [719]*719Supreme Court (Keegan, J.), entered December 12, 2000 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Parole denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Petitioner has reappeared before the Board of Parole since the parole release determination giving rise to this proceeding and his request for parole release has again been denied. Given petitioner’s subsequent appearance before the Board, the instant matter is now moot and must be dismissed (see, Matter of Bermudez v New York State Div. of Parole, 281 AD2d 673). Were we to reach the merits of the petition, we would find that the Board’s 1999 determination is neither arbitrary nor capricious and is supported by substantial evidence.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 A.D.2d 718, 732 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marcelin-v-travis-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack