Semkus v. Burns

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Semkus v. Burns

120 A.D.2d 972, 502 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 57078

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

DecidedMay 23, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 120 A.D.2d 972 (Semkus v. Burns) 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

Semkus v. Burns, 120 A.D.2d 972, 502 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 57078 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment, insofar as appealed from, unanimously reversed, on the law, and petition granted, in accordance with the following memorandum: Respondents concede that allegations regarding petitioner’s conviction for armed robbery and involvement in an escape are false and would not be considered in a review of his security [973]*973classification. This information must, therefore, be expunged from petitioner’s institutional record to preclude any mistaken consideration of the data in future determinations of security classification, eligibility for parole, or other administrative matters. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Contiguglia, J. — art 78.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Pine and Balio, JJ.

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

— Judgment, insofar as appealed from, unanimously reversed, on the law, and petition granted, in accordance with the following memorandum: Respondents concede that allegations regarding petitioner’s conviction for armed robbery and involvement in an escape are false and would not be considered in a review of his security [973]*973classification. This information must, therefore, be expunged from petitioner’s institutional record to preclude any mistaken consideration of the data in future determinations of security classification, eligibility for parole, or other administrative matters. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Contiguglia, J. — art 78.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Pine and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

120 A.D.2d 972, 502 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 57078, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/semkus-v-burns-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack