People ex rel. Frazier v. Rodriguez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Frazier v. Rodriguez

119 A.D.2d 781, 501 N.Y.S.2d 188, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55721

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

DecidedApril 21, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 119 A.D.2d 781 (People ex rel. Frazier v. Rodriguez) 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. Frazier v. Rodriguez, 119 A.D.2d 781, 501 N.Y.S.2d 188, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55721 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Reed, J.), entered December 12, 1984, which dismissed the writ.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The remedy of habeas corpus is not available in the instant case, as the petitioner is not entitled to immediate release, having been incarcerated on new charges for crimes committed while on parole (see, e.g., People ex rel. Mendolia v Superintendent, 47 NY2d 779). In any event, it is clear that the decision to revoke the petitioner’s parole was supported by a preponderance of the evidence at the final hearing, specifically, the certificate of conviction of the crimes of burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and the petitioner’s failure to deny his conviction of burglary (see, Executive Law § 259-i [3] [f] [viii]; 9 NYCRR 8005.2 [d]).

We have considered the petitioner’s other claims and find them to be without merit. Niehoff, J. P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

— In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Reed, J.), entered December 12, 1984, which dismissed the writ.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The remedy of habeas corpus is not available in the instant case, as the petitioner is not entitled to immediate release, having been incarcerated on new charges for crimes committed while on parole (see, e.g., People ex rel. Mendolia v Superintendent, 47 NY2d 779). In any event, it is clear that the decision to revoke the petitioner’s parole was supported by a preponderance of the evidence at the final hearing, specifically, the certificate of conviction of the crimes of burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and the petitioner’s failure to deny his conviction of burglary (see, Executive Law § 259-i [3] [f] [viii]; 9 NYCRR 8005.2 [d]).

We have considered the petitioner’s other claims and find them to be without merit. Niehoff, J. P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 A.D.2d 781, 501 N.Y.S.2d 188, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-frazier-v-rodriguez-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack