Mina v. Hammock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mina v. Hammock

111 A.D.2d 813, 491 N.Y.S.2d 8, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50059

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

DecidedJune 10, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 111 A.D.2d 813 (Mina v. Hammock) 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

Mina v. Hammock, 111 A.D.2d 813, 491 N.Y.S.2d 8, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50059 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent denying petitioner parole, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (King, J.), entered February 16, 1984, which dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The parole board adhered to statutory requirements when it considered petitioner’s over-all record, including the severity of his crime in denying him parole (see, 9 NYCRR 8002.3 [a], 8001.3). Its decision was both proper and rational, and as such, should not be disturbed (Matter of Russo v New York State Bd. of Parole, 50 NY2d 69). Mollen, P. J., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent denying petitioner parole, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (King, J.), entered February 16, 1984, which dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The parole board adhered to statutory requirements when it considered petitioner’s over-all record, including the severity of his crime in denying him parole (see, 9 NYCRR 8002.3 [a], 8001.3). Its decision was both proper and rational, and as such, should not be disturbed (Matter of Russo v New York State Bd. of Parole, 50 NY2d 69). Mollen, P. J., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.2d 813, 491 N.Y.S.2d 8, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mina-v-hammock-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack