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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

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

111 A.D.2d 940, 491 N.Y.S.2d 50, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50218

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

DecidedJune 24, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 111 A.D.2d 940 (People ex rel. Wallace v. New York State Board of Parole) 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. Wallace v. New York State Board of Parole, 111 A.D.2d 940, 491 N.Y.S.2d 50, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50218 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

In a habeas corpus proceeding petitioner [941]*941appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), dated March 29,1984, which dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

In the instant proceeding, petitioner sought release from incarceration on a parole violation warrant on the ground that the Parole Board lacked jurisdiction to prosecute him for a violation based on criminal charges pending in the courts. However, the Division of Parole has the authority to revoke parole if a preponderance of the evidence presented at a hearing shows that a violation of parole conditions has occurred, regardless of the pendency of criminal charges based on the same evidence (Executive Law § 259-i; People ex rel. Maggio v Casscles, 28 NY2d 415). Further, petitioner’s double jeopardy claim is without merit (People ex rel. Miller v Harris, 74 AD2d 885).

Petitioner’s claim that the hearing evidence was legally insufficient to sustain the violation is not properly before this court for review since the parole revocation hearing occurred subsequent to the filing of the notice of appeal herein (Matter of Eagle v Paterson, 57 NY2d 831). Gibbons, J. P., Thompson, Weinstein and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

In a habeas corpus proceeding petitioner [941]*941appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), dated March 29,1984, which dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

In the instant proceeding, petitioner sought release from incarceration on a parole violation warrant on the ground that the Parole Board lacked jurisdiction to prosecute him for a violation based on criminal charges pending in the courts. However, the Division of Parole has the authority to revoke parole if a preponderance of the evidence presented at a hearing shows that a violation of parole conditions has occurred, regardless of the pendency of criminal charges based on the same evidence (Executive Law § 259-i; People ex rel. Maggio v Casscles, 28 NY2d 415). Further, petitioner’s double jeopardy claim is without merit (People ex rel. Miller v Harris, 74 AD2d 885).

Petitioner’s claim that the hearing evidence was legally insufficient to sustain the violation is not properly before this court for review since the parole revocation hearing occurred subsequent to the filing of the notice of appeal herein (Matter of Eagle v Paterson, 57 NY2d 831). Gibbons, J. P., Thompson, Weinstein and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.2d 940, 491 N.Y.S.2d 50, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-wallace-v-new-york-state-board-of-parole-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack