Matter of Desmarat v. Martuscello

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 25, 2026
DocketCV-25-1464
StatusPublished

This text of Matter of Desmarat v. Martuscello (Matter of Desmarat v. Martuscello) 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
Matter of Desmarat v. Martuscello, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

Matter of Desmarat v Martuscello - 2026 NY Slip Op 04020
skip to main content

It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.

Law Reporting
Bureau
Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter

Matter of Desmarat v Martuscello

2026 NY Slip Op 04020

June 25, 2026

Appellate Division, Third Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

In the Matter of Jean Marc Desmarat, Petitioner,

v

Daniel F. Martuscello III, as Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, et al., Respondents.

Decided and Entered:June 25, 2026

CV-25-1464

Calendar Date: May 22, 2026

Before: Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Fisher And Mackey, JJ.

Jean Marc Desmarat, Napanoch, petitioner pro se.

Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondents.

[*1]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Superintendent of Woodbourne Correctional Facility finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a tier II disciplinary finding that he had violated certain prison disciplinary rules. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination at issue has been administratively reversed, all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner's institutional record and the mandatory $5 surcharge has been refunded to petitioner's account. Inasmuch as petitioner has received all of the relief to which he is entitled, this matter is dismissed as moot (see Matter of Leonard v Titus, 239 AD3d 1132, 1132 [3d Dept 2025]; Matter of Acevedo v Annucci, 237 AD3d 1331, 1331 [3d Dept 2025]).

Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Fisher and Mackey, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Court Decisions

All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search

Resources

RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting & Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index

About

About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter

Quick Contact Info

17 Lodge Street

Albany, NY 12207

Phone: (518) 453-6900

Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Matter of Desmarat v. Martuscello, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-desmarat-v-martuscello-nyappdiv-2026.