People ex rel. Gaito v. Couture
Opinion
—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Demarest, J.), entered May 10, 1999 in St. Lawrence County, which dismissed petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, after a hearing.
Petitioner was sentenced to serve an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 5 to 15 years for various felony convictions and was subsequently released to parole supervision. Petitioner was thereafter charged with parole violations and, following a February 1998 final parole revocation hearing, his parole was revoked. Although petitioner requested an administrative appeal in April 1998, in the interim he brought this application in January 1999 seeking a writ of habeas corpus claiming that the parole regulations relied upon in assessing the penalty at his parole revocation hearing were unconstitutional ex post facto laws. Petitioner’s application was dismissed by Supreme Court and we affirm.
[710] It is well settled that “[h]abeas corpus relief is inappropriate in cases where the claimed errors could have been remedied by means of an administrative appeal” (People ex rel. Vazquez v Travis, 236 AD2d 745, 746, appeal dismissed 91 NY2d 847; see, People ex rel. Lee v La Paglia, 249 AD2d 601, 602, lv denied 92 NY2d 807).
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
269 A.D.2d 709 (People ex rel. Gaito v. Couture) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.