Searles v. Dennison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Searles v. Dennison

24 A.D.3d 860, 804 N.Y.S.2d 281

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

DecidedDecember 1, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.3d 860 (Searles v. Dennison) 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

Searles v. Dennison, 24 A.D.3d 860, 804 N.Y.S.2d 281 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered May 24, 2005 in Franklin County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CELR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Fa-role denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Since the September 2003 determination giving rise to this CELR article 78 proceeding, petitioner has reappeared before the Board of Farole and his request for parole release again has been denied. Given petitioner’s subsequent reappearance before the Board in August 2005, the instant appeal is now moot and must be dismissed (see Matter of Marnell v New York State Div. of Parole, 20 AD3d 805 [2005]).

Crew III, J.P., Feters, Spain, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered May 24, 2005 in Franklin County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CELR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Fa-role denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Since the September 2003 determination giving rise to this CELR article 78 proceeding, petitioner has reappeared before the Board of Farole and his request for parole release again has been denied. Given petitioner’s subsequent reappearance before the Board in August 2005, the instant appeal is now moot and must be dismissed (see Matter of Marnell v New York State Div. of Parole, 20 AD3d 805 [2005]).

Crew III, J.P., Feters, Spain, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.3d 860, 804 N.Y.S.2d 281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/searles-v-dennison-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack