Postall v. Alexander

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Postall v. Alexander

74 A.D.3d 1078, 902 N.Y.S.2d 400

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

DecidedJune 15, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 74 A.D.3d 1078 (Postall v. Alexander) 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

Postall v. Alexander, 74 A.D.3d 1078, 902 N.Y.S.2d 400 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Division of Parole dated March 24, 2008, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s request to be released on parole, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Zambelli, J.), entered May 15, 2009, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal has been rendered academic by the petitioner’s subsequent appearance before the Board of Parole, following which he was again denied release (see Matter of Moissett v Travis, 97 NY2d 673 [2001]; Matter of Lee v Russi, 211 AD2d 720 [1995]). Santucci, J.P., Angiolillo, Dickerson and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Division of Parole dated March 24, 2008, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s request to be released on parole, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Zambelli, J.), entered May 15, 2009, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal has been rendered academic by the petitioner’s subsequent appearance before the Board of Parole, following which he was again denied release (see Matter of Moissett v Travis, 97 NY2d 673 [2001]; Matter of Lee v Russi, 211 AD2d 720 [1995]). Santucci, J.P., Angiolillo, Dickerson and Austin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 A.D.3d 1078, 902 N.Y.S.2d 400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/postall-v-alexander-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack