People ex rel. Leventhal v. New York State Board of Parole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Leventhal v. New York State Board of Parole

53 A.D.2d 621, 384 N.Y.S.2d 33, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13316

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 3, 1976·Published

Opinion

In a habeas corpus proceeding, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated May 5, 1976, which (1) granted his application to the extent of directing respondents to afford him a final parole revocation hearing on a certain date, (2) otherwise dismissed the proceeding and (3) remanded petitioner to the custody of the respondents. Judgment reversed, on the law and in the interest of justice, without costs or disbursements, and respondents are directed to discharge petitioner from custody forthwith. No fact findings were presented for review. In view of all the circumstances shown in this record, including the delay in affording petitioner a final parole revocation hearing, the violation of his due process [622] rights at the preliminary hearing and the fact that the maximum expiration date of his sentence was February 6, 1976, we feel that a reversal of the judgment is warranted (see Matter of Beattie v New York State Bd. of Parole, 47 AD2d 656). Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Rabin, Shapiro and Titone, JJ., concur.

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

In a habeas corpus proceeding, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated May 5, 1976, which (1) granted his application to the extent of directing respondents to afford him a final parole revocation hearing on a certain date, (2) otherwise dismissed the proceeding and (3) remanded petitioner to the custody of the respondents. Judgment reversed, on the law and in the interest of justice, without costs or disbursements, and respondents are directed to discharge petitioner from custody forthwith. No fact findings were presented for review. In view of all the circumstances shown in this record, including the delay in affording petitioner a final parole revocation hearing, the violation of his due process [622] rights at the preliminary hearing and the fact that the maximum expiration date of his sentence was February 6, 1976, we feel that a reversal of the judgment is warranted (see Matter of Beattie v New York State Bd. of Parole, 47 AD2d 656). Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Rabin, Shapiro and Titone, JJ., concur.

People ex rel. Leventhal v. New York State Board of Parole, 53 A.D.2d 621, 384 N.Y.S.2d 33, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13316 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

53 A.D.2d 621 (People ex rel. Leventhal v. New York State Board of Parole) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related