People ex rel. Gaito v. Couture

268 A.D.2d 914, 702 N.Y.S.2d 446, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 816
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 27, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 268 A.D.2d 914 (People ex rel. Gaito v. Couture) 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. Gaito v. Couture, 268 A.D.2d 914, 702 N.Y.S.2d 446, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 816 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

Crew III, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Demarest, J.), entered December 12, 1998 in St. Lawrence County, which dismissed petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.

Petitioner was charged with violating certain conditions of his parole relating to restrictions on his place of residence. Following a final parole revocation hearing, petitioner’s parole was revoked and it was ordered that he be detained until the maximum expiration date of his previously imposed sentences. Prior to perfecting his administrative appeal, petitioner filed an application for habeas corpus relief challenging the determination to revoke his parole. Supreme Court dismissed petitioner’s application due to petitioner’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. Petitioner now appeals.

We affirm. “Judicial review of alleged errors in the parole revocation process is precluded prior to the exhaustion of [administrative] remedies” (People ex rel. Woods v McGreevy, 191 AD2d 938, 941), and neither the type of constitutional claims raised in the petition nor petitioner’s conclusory and unsupported contention that administrative review would have been futile justify departing from this general rule (see generally, Watergate II Apts. v Buffalo Sewer Auth., 46 NY2d 52, 57 [exceptions to exhaustion requirement]). In light of this conclusion, we need not address the remaining arguments raised by petitioner.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Carpinello and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

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

Related

Toro v. Evans
95 A.D.3d 1573 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People ex rel. Webster v. Travis
277 A.D.2d 546 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
268 A.D.2d 914, 702 N.Y.S.2d 446, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 816, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-gaito-v-couture-nyappdiv-2000.