People ex rel. Tuff v. Walters

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Tuff v. Walters

111 A.D.2d 838, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50092

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

DecidedJune 10, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 111 A.D.2d 838 (People ex rel. Tuff v. Walters) 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. Tuff v. Walters, 111 A.D.2d 838, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50092 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

In a habeas corpus proceeding, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Slifkin, J.), entered January 29, 1982, which dismissed the proceeding and denied the writ.

Appeal dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

Since petitioner has already been released from state prison, he is not entitled to habeas corpus relief (People ex rel. Julio v Walters, 58 NY2d 881; People ex rel. Giles v Walters, 90 AD2d 801; People ex rel. Bovian v Johnson, 103 AD2d 813; People ex rel. Davidson v Walters, 100 AD2d 917). However, we note that even without including the time that petitioner was in Federal custody, the record conclusively demonstrates that petitioner was not given the required final parole revocation hearing [839]*839within 90 days of his waiver of a preliminary parole revocation hearing (see, Executive Law § 259-i [3] [f] [i]; People ex rel. Gonzales v Dalsheim, 52 NY2d 9). Lazer, J. P., Mangano, O’Con-nor and Brown, 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, Westchester County (Slifkin, J.), entered January 29, 1982, which dismissed the proceeding and denied the writ.

Appeal dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

Since petitioner has already been released from state prison, he is not entitled to habeas corpus relief (People ex rel. Julio v Walters, 58 NY2d 881; People ex rel. Giles v Walters, 90 AD2d 801; People ex rel. Bovian v Johnson, 103 AD2d 813; People ex rel. Davidson v Walters, 100 AD2d 917). However, we note that even without including the time that petitioner was in Federal custody, the record conclusively demonstrates that petitioner was not given the required final parole revocation hearing [839]*839within 90 days of his waiver of a preliminary parole revocation hearing (see, Executive Law § 259-i [3] [f] [i]; People ex rel. Gonzales v Dalsheim, 52 NY2d 9). Lazer, J. P., Mangano, O’Con-nor and Brown, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.2d 838, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50092, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-tuff-v-walters-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack