People Ex Rel. Duchnowski v. New York State Division of Parole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People Ex Rel. Duchnowski v. New York State Division of Parole

123 A.D.3d 1156, 997 N.Y.S.2d 638

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 31, 2014·No. 2013-09875·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70 for a writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Calabrese, J.), entered October 2, 2013, which, after a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

*1157 Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the respondents demonstrated that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to a preliminary parole revocation hearing (see Executive Law § 259-i [3] [c] [i]; Matter of White v New York State Div. of Parole, 60 NY2d 920 [1983]; People ex rel. Strickland v Miranda, 264 AD2d 789, 789 [1999]; People ex rel. Aquino v New York State Bd. of Parole, 250 AD2d 789, 789 [1998]; People ex rel. Romero v Johnson, 122 AD2d 240, 241 [1986]; cf. People ex rel. Melendez v Warden of Rikers Is. Correctional Facility, 214 AD2d 301, 301-303 [1995]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court correctly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Austin and Maltese, 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 70 for a writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Calabrese, J.), entered October 2, 2013, which, after a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

*1157 Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the respondents demonstrated that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to a preliminary parole revocation hearing (see Executive Law § 259-i [3] [c] [i]; Matter of White v New York State Div. of Parole, 60 NY2d 920 [1983]; People ex rel. Strickland v Miranda, 264 AD2d 789, 789 [1999]; People ex rel. Aquino v New York State Bd. of Parole, 250 AD2d 789, 789 [1998]; People ex rel. Romero v Johnson, 122 AD2d 240, 241 [1986]; cf. People ex rel. Melendez v Warden of Rikers Is. Correctional Facility, 214 AD2d 301, 301-303 [1995]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court correctly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Austin and Maltese, JJ., concur.

People Ex Rel. Duchnowski v. New York State Division of Parole, 123 A.D.3d 1156, 997 N.Y.S.2d 638 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

123 A.D.3d 1156 (People Ex Rel. Duchnowski v. New York State Division of Parole) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related