People ex rel. Hurd, Matter of v. Warden, G.R.V.C., Riker's Is.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Hurd, Matter of v. Warden, G.R.V.C., Riker's Is.

135 A.D.3d 568, 22 N.Y.S.3d 853

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

DecidedJanuary 19, 2016

Docket16685 400919/14

StatusPublished

This text of 135 A.D.3d 568 (People ex rel. Hurd, Matter of v. Warden, G.R.V.C., Riker's Is.) 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. Hurd, Matter of v. Warden, G.R.V.C., Riker's Is., 135 A.D.3d 568, 22 N.Y.S.3d 853 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from judgment (denominated an order), Supreme Court, New York County (Anthony J. Ferrara, J.), entered on or about August 7, 2014, denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 70, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

This appeal challenging the legality of petitioner’s pretrial detention is moot, since he is currently incarcerated as the result of his conviction and sentencing (People ex rel. Macgiollabhui v Schriro, 123 AD3d 633 [1st Dept 2014]), and no exception to the mootness doctrine applies (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715 [1980]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Acosta, Andrias and Moskowitz, JJ.

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

Appeal from judgment (denominated an order), Supreme Court, New York County (Anthony J. Ferrara, J.), entered on or about August 7, 2014, denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 70, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

This appeal challenging the legality of petitioner’s pretrial detention is moot, since he is currently incarcerated as the result of his conviction and sentencing (People ex rel. Macgiollabhui v Schriro, 123 AD3d 633 [1st Dept 2014]), and no exception to the mootness doctrine applies (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715 [1980]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Acosta, Andrias and Moskowitz, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 A.D.3d 568, 22 N.Y.S.3d 853, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-hurd-matter-of-v-warden-grvc-rikers-is-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack