Matter of Ortiz v. Annucci

183 N.Y.S.3d 921, 2023 NY Slip Op 01401
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 17, 2023
Docket142 CA 22-00445
StatusPublished

This text of 183 N.Y.S.3d 921 (Matter of Ortiz 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.

Bluebook
Matter of Ortiz v. Annucci, 183 N.Y.S.3d 921, 2023 NY Slip Op 01401 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Matter of Ortiz v Annucci (2023 NY Slip Op 01401)
Matter of Ortiz v Annucci
2023 NY Slip Op 01401
Decided on March 17, 2023
Appellate Division, Fourth 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 on March 17, 2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., LINDLEY, CURRAN, BANNISTER, AND MONTOUR, JJ.

142 CA 22-00445

[*1]IN THE MATTER OF JOSE ORTIZ, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

v

ANTHONY ANNUCCI, ACTING COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.


WYOMING COUNTY-ATTICA LEGAL AID BUREAU, WARSAW (LEAH R. NOWOTARSKI OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.

LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (SARAH L. ROSENBLUTH OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.



Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Wyoming County (Michael M. Mohun, A.J.), entered February 7, 2022 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment dismissed the petition.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing his CPLR article 78 petition seeking to annul the Parole Board's determination denying his request for release to parole supervision. The Attorney General has advised this Court that, subsequent to that denial and during the pendency of this appeal, petitioner reappeared before the Parole Board in January 2023 and was again denied release. Consequently, this appeal must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Colon v Annucci, 177 AD3d 1393, 1394 [4th Dept 2019]; Matter of Hill v Annucci, 149 AD3d 1540, 1541 [4th Dept 2017]). Contrary to petitioner's contention, this matter does not fall within the exception to the mootness doctrine (see Colon, 177 AD3d at 1394; see generally Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715 [1980]).

Entered: March 17, 2023

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

Hearst Corp. v. Clyne
409 N.E.2d 876 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)
Hill v. Annucci
149 A.D.3d 1540 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
183 N.Y.S.3d 921, 2023 NY Slip Op 01401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-ortiz-v-annucci-nyappdiv-2023.