People ex rel. Van Luven v. Henderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Van Luven v. Henderson

57 A.D.2d 729, 395 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11786

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

DecidedApril 15, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 57 A.D.2d 729 (People ex rel. Van Luven v. Henderson) 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. Van Luven v. Henderson, 57 A.D.2d 729, 395 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11786 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Relator was sentenced in Supreme Court, Cayuga County, on April 26, 1965 on his plea of guilty to grand larceny, first degree, [730]*730to an indeterminate sentence of 7 to 15 years. On January 20, 1976, he was given a parole release hearing. His parole was denied, and he was furnished with the following written statement of the reasons for denial of parole: "1. You are a parole violator; 2. You have been granted probation in the past; 3. This is your eighth (8th) conviction; 4. You do not learn from experience; 5. You have unrealistic plans for the future.” Special Term dismissed relator’s petition to require a further statement from the Board of Parole. It found the reasons given were meaningful and sufficient and we agree that they were (see Matter of Ebbs v Regan, 54 AD2d 611; People ex rel. Ganci v Henderson, 54 AD2d 609; Matter of Watkins v Caldwell, 54 AD2d 42). (Appeal from judgment of Cayuga Supreme Court—habeas corpus.) Present —Moule, J. P., Cardamone, Simons, Dillon and Witmer, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Relator was sentenced in Supreme Court, Cayuga County, on April 26, 1965 on his plea of guilty to grand larceny, first degree, [730]*730to an indeterminate sentence of 7 to 15 years. On January 20, 1976, he was given a parole release hearing. His parole was denied, and he was furnished with the following written statement of the reasons for denial of parole: "1. You are a parole violator; 2. You have been granted probation in the past; 3. This is your eighth (8th) conviction; 4. You do not learn from experience; 5. You have unrealistic plans for the future.” Special Term dismissed relator’s petition to require a further statement from the Board of Parole. It found the reasons given were meaningful and sufficient and we agree that they were (see Matter of Ebbs v Regan, 54 AD2d 611; People ex rel. Ganci v Henderson, 54 AD2d 609; Matter of Watkins v Caldwell, 54 AD2d 42). (Appeal from judgment of Cayuga Supreme Court—habeas corpus.) Present —Moule, J. P., Cardamone, Simons, Dillon and Witmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 729, 395 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11786, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-van-luven-v-henderson-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack