People ex rel. Argro v. Scoralick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Argro v. Scoralick

170 A.D.2d 554

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

DecidedFebruary 11, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 170 A.D.2d 554 (People ex rel. Argro v. Scoralick) 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

People ex rel. Argro v. Scoralick, 170 A.D.2d 554 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

In a habeas corpus proceeding, the appeal is from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (King, J.), dated May 21, 1987, which dismissed the proceeding and [555]*555remanded the petitioner to the custody of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

In 1984 the petitioner, an inmate in New York, requested that he be returned to the Commonwealth of Virginia to dispose of an armed robbery charge. This request was honored and he was sent to Virginia where he stood trial, was found guilty and was sentenced. He was then returned to New York to complete his term of incarceration. Upon completion of his term in New York, he was returned to Virginia so that he might begin serving his sentence there. As the petitioner has already been returned to the Commonwealth of Virginia, the issues asserted in this appeal have been rendered academic (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Balletta, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

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

In a habeas corpus proceeding, the appeal is from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (King, J.), dated May 21, 1987, which dismissed the proceeding and [555]*555remanded the petitioner to the custody of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

In 1984 the petitioner, an inmate in New York, requested that he be returned to the Commonwealth of Virginia to dispose of an armed robbery charge. This request was honored and he was sent to Virginia where he stood trial, was found guilty and was sentenced. He was then returned to New York to complete his term of incarceration. Upon completion of his term in New York, he was returned to Virginia so that he might begin serving his sentence there. As the petitioner has already been returned to the Commonwealth of Virginia, the issues asserted in this appeal have been rendered academic (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Balletta, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 A.D.2d 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-argro-v-scoralick-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack