Matter of Joseph v. Annucci
This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 04107 (Matter of Joseph v. Annucci) 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.
Opinion
| Matter of Joseph v Annucci |
| 2024 NY Slip Op 04107 |
| Decided on August 1, 2024 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided and Entered:August 1, 2024
CV-24-0028
v
Anthony J. Annucci, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.
Calendar Date:June 14, 2024
Before:Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and McShan, JJ.
Jeffrey Joseph, Alden, petitioner pro se.
Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondent.
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 respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a tier III disciplinary determination finding him guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination has been administratively reversed and all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner's institutional record.[FN1] As petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, the appeal must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Ross v Rodriguez, 225 AD3d 1051, 1052 [3d Dept 2024]; Matter of Windley v Rodriguez, 224 AD3d 983, 984 [3d Dept 2024]). Because the record reflects that petitioner paid a filing fee of $305 and he has requested a refund thereof, we grant his request for that amount (see Matter of Blanchard v Venettozzi, 194 AD3d 1295, 1295 [3d Dept 2021]).
Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and McShan, JJ., concur.
ADJUDGED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs, but with disbursements in the amount of $305.
Footnote 1: The Attorney General indicates that the mandatory $5 surcharge was not taken out of petitioner's account.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2024 NY Slip Op 04107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-joseph-v-annucci-nyappdiv-2024.